No love for monks?

[DavidBV]

I think all the base classes from the Player's Handbook are represented by one or more powerful characters in the comic... except monk. No monk in the OoTS, or in the Order of the Scribble, or among the villiains. And Rich in fact laughed at their class concept in Origin of the PCs.

Is this a personal dislike from Rich for monks, or just coincidence?

[Kish]

Rich=/=Belkar. Really.

Beyond that, we'll see. If he has jokes to make about monks that weren't covered in OtOoPCs or by Miko, we'll see monks. If they fit the plot, we'll see monks.

[ClockShock]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html

And she took on the entirety of the Order, (less Durkon)
Twice

[factotum]

Agreed. Miko had at least a couple of levels of Monk and she made good use of them in her fight with Roy after she Fell.

Although I think Rich's mocking of the class in OtOoPCs was pretty accurate...having a class designed to fight bare-handed and having them still deal more damage if they pick up a weapon is a bit daft, frankly.

[Optimystik]

Although I think Rich's mocking of the class in OtOoPCs was pretty accurate...having a class designed to fight bare-handed and having them still deal more damage if they pick up a weapon is a bit daft, frankly.

"But... four attacks!"


Rich=/=Belkar. Really.

Beyond that, we'll see. If he has jokes to make about monks that weren't covered in OtOoPCs or by Miko, we'll see monks. If they fit the plot, we'll see monks.

Or by Daigo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0644.html) :smalltongue:

[DavidBV]

Miko has a few levels of Monk, sure, but that's not the same thing.

Plus I think the multiclass from Miko is not very optimized and actually means a complete waste of levels, since in armor she loses the AC bonus, movement and Flurry of Blows special powers. She can certainly be no representative of the monk class, just because she has a Stunning Fist with a few more uses available.

EDIT: maybe she is unarmored? not sure really. Interesting concept then, but still of dubious optimization, as I doubt the AC bonus from Wis plus a high Dex bonus can be better than a magical full plate. Unless she has 11 levels in monk, which would certainly make things interesting... but unlikely that she's so high level.

[Shale]

If Miko made it to third level as a monk, she has +2 against saving throws vs. enchantment (Paladins love their saving throw bonuses). She seems to be wearing light armor, which means she has Evasion, always handy. She gets Combat Reflexes as a bonus feat, and that's a good feat for a dual-wielding melee specialist, all the more so when she has to do a lot of crowd control (since she fights solo). That plus Stunning Fist/Kick is...well, there's worse builds.

[Acero]

I agree. monks are awesome, but im not Rich (in both the level of wealt and our beloved author) so its not my choice to make

[Kobold-Bard]

No love for Incarnum either. Clearly OotS is just a medium for Rich ot mock everything he dislikes about D&D 3.5

[derfenrirwolv]

3 levels of monk is pretty hard core optimization if you're playing a paladin that rolled darn near strait 18's. You only loose a few hps, and you gain fort reflex and most importantly will saves, along with another +2 against mind affecting spells (a fighter.. even a paladins, biggest weakness)

Its not like paladins have a lot of class abilities after 4th level. Sure, while you're 6th level and not getting an extra attack it may bite, but after that you'd never notice

[Math_Mage]

No love for Incarnum either. Clearly OotS is just a medium for Rich ot mock everything he dislikes about D&D 3.5

Well, they appear...but since they're less useful than fortune cookies and an 8-ball, the boot still fits.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html
:smallsmile:

[drengnikrafe]

I told you! My campaign is set in a fantasized Western medieval period. There are no monks in my world.
Really. How do you fit a monk in? It just... it doesn't fit.

[Kish]

At least as well as ninjas or all-blue cities.

[The Extinguisher]

3 levels of monk is pretty hard core optimization if you're playing a paladin that rolled darn near strait 18's. You only loose a few hps, and you gain fort reflex and most importantly will saves, along with another +2 against mind affecting spells (a fighter.. even a paladins, biggest weakness)

Its not like paladins have a lot of class abilities after 4th level. Sure, while you're 6th level and not getting an extra attack it may bite, but after that you'd never notice

If you roll all 18's, why not become a monk. Then at least you will be effective.

[derfenrirwolv]

If you roll all 18's, why not become a monk. Then at least you will be effective.

But not as effective as a paladin monk. The monks low bab will eventually catch up with you. this way she picks up full bab and gets to capitalize on that charismia with uber saves.

[SaintRidley]

If you roll all 18's, why not become a monk. Then at least you will be effective.

Eh. No more effective than a fighter with one 18. Which is to say still not terribly effective.

[factotum]

No love for Incarnum either. Clearly OotS is just a medium for Rich ot mock everything he dislikes about D&D 3.5

Of course it is! The hundreds of strips of character development and storyline are really just a front for Rich to repeat what everyone else says are the worst classes in D&D 3.5...I am astounded that I did not see this self-evident truth until you said it!

(Sorry if I broke anyone's sarcasm detector there...:smallsmile:).

[Math_Mage]

Of course it is! The hundreds of strips of character development and storyline are really just a front for Rich to repeat what everyone else says are the worst classes in D&D 3.5...I am astounded that I did not see this self-evident truth until you said it!

(Sorry if I broke anyone's sarcasm detector there...:smallsmile:).

IT'S OFF THE CHARTS! RETREAT! RETREAT!!!

*kaboom*

[slayerx]

.

But not as effective as a paladin monk. The monks low bab will eventually catch up with you. this way she picks up full bab and gets to capitalize on that charismia with uber saves.
if you are willing to get away with light armor, evasion would be a nice ability to have too...

i think the low Bab is generally made up by the flurry of blows...
at level 11, while they may have lower bab, they get two extra attacks at their highest bab... So while a level 20 fighter has 20/15/10/5, the monk has 15/15/15/10/5... What the monk looses in higher bab, he gains in 2 extra attacks

granted it does seem a bit of a raw deal considering how Monk's are supposed to go into melee combat naked... you'd think they'd get bab like the other fighting classes, or get a d10 for hp like fighters... even with that wisdom bonus to AC, having no armor makes me feel squishy


Although I think Rich's mocking of the class in OtOoPCs was pretty accurate...having a class designed to fight bare-handed and having them still deal more damage if they pick up a weapon is a bit daft, frankly.
kinda depends on the level... eventually they get to the point where their hands deal more damage than normal weapons... though that's not accounting for what kinda of modifiers you might be able to find on weapons at that level

[DavidBV]

i think the low Bab is generally made up by the flurry of blows...
at level 11, while they may have lower bab, they get two extra attacks at their highest bab... So while a level 20 fighter has 20/15/10/5, the monk has 15/15/15/10/5... What the monk looses in higher bab, he gains in 2 extra attacks

granted it does seem a bit of a raw deal considering how Monk's are supposed to go into melee combat naked... you'd think they'd get bab like the other fighting classes, or get a d10 for hp like fighters... even with that wisdom bonus to AC, having no armor makes me feel squishy


The problem with multiclassing a monk is, you get cool stuff every few levels, and very likely it's much better to stay a monk.

Let's imagine the DM allows you to use flurry with a katana, which he shouldn't according to rules but somehow it would fit conceptually. At monk 11 paladin 5, unarmored but having a high WIS and DEX, you're probably stronger melee-wise than a 16 paladin, both in offense and defense... but you would really resist the temptation of not gaining Diamond Soul at just 2 more levels? And at 14, +1 to all saves, etc etc.

[Ancalagon]

Really. How do you fit a monk in? It just... it doesn't fit.

Actually, medival europe had close combat techniques that were as elaborated and effective as the asian ones. They just were not handed down to today and so they are... gone.

So having an "unarmed close combat fighter" very well fits in any medival setting. You use the rules for the monk and simply don't call it "monk" (as the medival european monk is a bit... hum... different) and don't describe his fighting as anything that resembles Kung Fu.

[hamishspence]

And if you do want a hint of medieval European monk, Friar Tuck might be a possible archetype. Formidable wrestler, capable of fighting Robin Hood to a standstill.

[TriForce]

Wait wait waaaaait, is this about no being a monk in the oots or about no OPTIMIZED monk in oots? the first is nonsence with miko using her monk abilities rather often, and the second is simply bull****, as optimization has nothing to do with the story whatsoever.

[Ancalagon]

Friar Tuck is probably more a unique/rare case and not an archetype.

While you still can create a close-combat-monk (like Friar Tuck) I'd still be against calling his class or profession "monk". He's he fighter that also happens to be a monk that uses the "monk" class, but I'd not describe what he is as "monk" (as monks in D&D are more asian-fighters).
Hum... err... it's not as confusing as it sounds, I promise. ;)

But I agree that Friar Tuck would be an excellent fighting european monk "monk". In that case, I'd just say "I play a Friar-Tuck-like character and use the monk class, is that ok?" to the DM. ;)

[Ancalagon]

Wait wait waaaaait, is this about no being a monk in the oots or about no OPTIMIZED monk in oots? the first is nonsence with miko using her monk abilities rather often, and the second is simply bull****, as optimization has nothing to do with the story whatsoever.

We do not know how optimised the monk from Origin was. We know that Belkar made him feel bad about himself, but we have no idea what he could do, what his stats, feats, whatever are.

The ONLY character we saw in the comic that had monk-levels was quite effective. Actually, Miko seems to be one of the most effective (in regard to: powerful) characters we saw so far.

[hamishspence]

"Fighting monks" are a common thing in European history- but they tend to fit better into the paladin archetype.

I'm not sure if there was anything close to the D&D monk concept- in being almost as dangerous unarmed, as armed, and tending toward low armour.

[Fragenstein]

"Fighting monks" are a common thing in European history- but they tend to fit better into the paladin archetype.

I'm not sure if there was anything close to the D&D monk concept- in being almost as dangerous unarmed, as armed, and tending toward low armour.

Did you ever see the movie Reno Williams: The Adventure Begins? How about "The Destroyer" series of novels it was based on?

Gary Gyax claims, in the 1st edition Oriental Adventures that Brian Blume was inspired by Sinanju masters like Chiun when he created the base Monk class. So they were built on a fictional group of perfect assassins who abandoned the use of weapons centuries ago.

Personally, I love the monk class in spite of all its flaws, and I always try to push my characters closer towards the Wushu/Shaolin/Wudan/Wuxia character types. Even to the point of developing a Yóuxiá prestige class I hope to someday play (although I might have a more optimmized character by multi-classing to fighter and picking up some non-core feats). The PrC is built primarily from the Duelist class, but with some monk'ish tweaks.

Yóuxiá


Table: The Yóuxiá

Level BaB Fort Ref Will Special

1st +1 +0 +2 +0 Canny defense, Monk Abilities
2nd +2 +0 +3 +0 Improved reaction +2
3rd +3 +1 +3 +1 Enhanced mobility
4th +4 +1 +4 +1 Grace
5th +5 +1 +4 +1 Precise strike +1d6
6th +6 +2 +5 +2 Acrobatic charge
7th +7 +2 +5 +2 Elaborate parry
8th +8 +2 +6 +2 Improved reaction +4
9th +9 +3 +6 +3 Uncanny Dodge
10th +10 +3 +7 +3 Precise strike +2d6

Hit Die
d10.

Requirements
To qualify to become a yóuxiá , a character must fulfill all the following criteria.

Alignment
Any Good

Base Attack Bonus
+4.

Skills
Knowledge (Arcana) 3 ranks, Tumble 5 ranks.

Feats
Dodge, Mobility, Weapon Focus.

Class Skills
The yóuxiá’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are the same as for the Monk base class.

Skill Points at Each Level
4 + Int modifier.

Class Features

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
The yóuxiá gains no additional weapon, armor or shield proficiencies

Canny Defense (Ex)
When not wearing armor or using a shield, a yóuxiá adds 1 point of Intelligence bonus (if any) per yóuxiá class level to her Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while using a weapon with which she has Weapon Focus. If a yóuxiá is caught flat-footed or otherwise denied her Dexterity bonus, she also loses this bonus.

Monk Abilities
A yóuxiá's class levels stack with his monk levels for the purpose of determining his unarmed damage and bonuses to Armor Class, unarmored speed and flurry of blows. His class levels do not apply to other monk abilities such as slow fall, ki strike and so on.

Improved Reaction (Ex)
At 2nd level, a yóuxiá gains a +2 bonus on initiative checks.

At 8th level, the bonus increases to +4. This bonus stacks with the benefit provided by the Improved Initiative feat.

Enhanced Mobility (Ex)
When wearing no armor and not using a shield, a yóuxiá gains an additional +4 bonus to AC against attacks of opportunity caused when she moves out of a threatened square.

Grace (Ex)
At 4th level, a yóuxiá gains an additional +2 competence bonus on all Reflex saving throws. This ability functions for a yóuxiá only when she is wearing no armor and not using a shield.

Precise Strike (Ex)
At 5th level, a yóuxiá gains the ability to strike precisely with a wepaon with which she has Weapon Focus, gaining an extra 1d6 damage added to her normal damage roll. This ability stacks with the 6th level, Sleeping Tiger bonus ability of making sneak attacks.

When making a precise strike, a yóuxiá cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield. A yóuxiá ’s precise strike only works against living creatures with discernible anatomies. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to a precise strike, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from a precise strike. At 10th level, the extra damage on a precise strike increases to +2d6.

Acrobatic Charge (Ex)
At 6th level, a yóuxiá gains the ability to charge in situations where others cannot. She may charge over difficult terrain that normally slows movement. Depending on the circumstance, she may still need to make appropriate checks to successfully move over the terrain.

Elaborate Parry (Ex)
At 7th level and higher, if a yóuxiá chooses to fight defensively or use total defense in melee combat, she gains an additional +1 dodge bonus to AC for each level of yóuxiá she has.

Uncanny Dodge (Ex)
At 9th level, a yóuxiá retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker. However, he still loses his Dexterity bonus to AC if immobilized. If a yóuxiá already has uncanny dodge from a different class, he automatically gains improved uncanny dodge instead.


Multiclass Note
A monk who becomes a yóuxiá typically retains friendly ties with his instructors, however he has declared a definitive and irrevocable spit between the spiritual ways of a true monk and the more combative life of a wandering warrior. Because of this, the yóuxiá's levels may apply to some of the monk's class features (as listed above), but he may no longer advance as a monk.

[Asta Kask]

We do not know how optimised the monk from Origin was. We know that Belkar made him feel bad about himself, but we have no idea what he could do, what his stats, feats, whatever are.

And we know that Belkar is very good at making people feel bad. Although a monk should have a good Will save...

[Ancalagon]

"Fighting monks" are a common thing in European history- but they tend to fit better into the paladin archetype.

I'm not sure if there was anything close to the D&D monk concept- in being almost as dangerous unarmed, as armed, and tending toward low armour.

There was nothing close (at least in general, a few exceptions might have existed) to the Monks in D&D.

What you call "Fighting Monks" are more Knights and as you point out, the Paladin is more fitting. Just, well, without magic and real divine powers, so the "fighter archetype with a religious background" would be even more fitting.
An example would the Templar (I really, really do not want to bring them up here because most people have a quite twisted view on what they were and not were). But they really were what you would call "medival fighting monks". Just that they wore armour. And used swords. They were "Fighters" with a strict codex.

I bring this example (even at the risk of spinning a discussion about Templar and Illuminati ;)) to show that "medival fighting monks" cannot really be described/modelled by the monk-class of D&D. Other knight-orders (just think of the times of the crusades) of that time (1200s to 1400s) would also fit as example, though.

[hamishspence]

Yup- that was basically what I was saying.

What about the original "Assassins"? Might they be a little like a non-magic monk? Or were they not enough "unarmed fighting specialist" to count?

[Asta Kask]

There was nothing close (at least in general, a few exceptions might have existed) to the Monks in D&D.

My D&D Rules Encyclopedia has rules for Mystics (IIRC - they may be called something else), that were basically the same as Monks in 1st Ed. AD&D. Monastic aesthetics, as the rules famously put it... :smallsmile:

[derfenrirwolv]

i think the low Bab is generally made up by the flurry of blows...

Not really, and for two reasons.

1) Is that everyone is always moving around so much that its almost rare to see a full attack, which is required for flurry.

2) That monks don't get magic +'s to their attack and damage rolls as readily as fighters. Amulets of Mighty fists are far, FAR more expensive than a sword of a comperable +. While a fighter and a monk both have penalties to hit with the iterative attacks, a fighter's high bab, likely higher str, and magic weapon make up for it to some extent. A fighter is almost guaranteed to hit on his first attack, a monk isn't.




granted it does seem a bit of a raw deal considering how Monk's are supposed to go into melee combat naked... you'd think they'd get bab like the other fighting classes, or get a d10 for hp like fighters... even with that wisdom bonus to AC, having no armor makes me feel squishy

The wisdom bonus is usually comparable to normal armor.. the problem being that fighters aren't restricted to normal armor, they pick up magic armor.

[Optimystik]

The wisdom bonus is usually comparable to normal armor.. the problem being that fighters aren't restricted to normal armor, they pick up magic armor.

And magic armor can have very useful attributes for a melee class, like fortification and energy resistance.

[Ancalagon]

What about the original "Assassins"? Might they be a little like a non-magic monk? Or were they not enough "unarmed fighting specialist" to count?

Hui, interesting question. ;)
First we should decide if we talk about the real ones or the ones they became in our stories.

The ones in our stories surely could be modelled like Ninjas, some Monk-Rogue-combination or some Monk-that-also-can-use-weapons would surely work quite well.

The real ones are probably better off as normal rogues (backstabbers, poison) or even count as "relatively untrained fire & forget missile" (as they were not meant to survive their attack. Their schedule was like "See the paradise", "Train some", "Get high on drugs", "do the hit", "die", "arrive in paradise"). That's not even a "monk", just some average fanatic suicide bomstabber.


And magic armor can have very useful attributes for a melee class, like fortification and energy resistance.

Well, I don't see a problem in this regard.
The fighter gets a "chainmail that also gives some acid-resistence" (or whatever) and thus has "armour + extra", the monk has his armour build-in and then gets a "robe (not armour) of acid resistence".
Both wear an item on their "armour-slot" and both get "armour + extra". Not that much of an issue.

That a fighter can get "armour +x" and the monk is always stuck with his wisdom-modifier might be an issue (unless you level to ridiculous wisdom-scores (no one of us is able to actually play wis 22!)).

[Optimystik]

Well, I don't see a problem in this regard.
The fighter gets a "chainmail that also gives some acid-resistence" (or whatever) and thus has "armour + extra", the monk has his armour build-in and then gets a "robe (not armour) of acid resistence".
Both wear an item on their "armour-slot" and both get "armour + extra". Not that much of an issue.

That a fighter can get "armour +x" and the monk is always stuck with his wisdom-modifier might be an issue (unless you level to ridiculous wisdom-scores (no one of us is able to actually play wis 22!)).

While energy resistance is common on robes, there are very few robes with armor enhancements (again, like Fortification) that can come in quite handy for a frontliner.

Monks also can't use shields, another prime source of AC and enhancements.

[Ancalagon]

While energy resistance is common on robes, there are very few robes with armor enhancements (again, like Fortification) that can come in quite handy for a frontliner.

It's just one talk with your DM away. "Hey, think I could meet some clothmaker who could make/sell an item that...?"


Monks also can't use shields, another prime source of AC and enhancements.

That's an issue you can't go around. But on the other hand... there are other characters who also don't have shields and still work. Does anyone even make a monk who's not dual-striking in some way anyway? But the lack of shields is some sort of "disadvantage".

I think one thing got forgotten in this discussion: monks might not be "the most effective fighter ever invented" but they surely are cool to play and their special abilities enable them to simply to do many truely cool things in RP.

[Optimystik]

It's just one talk with your DM away. "Hey, think I could meet some clothmaker who could make/sell an item that...?"

If your DM is solving your class problems with fiat, then there's no need to discuss anything. Just have him make you an amulet with all the buffs you need and go naked. :smalltongue:


That's an issue you can't go around. But on the other hand... there are other characters who also don't have shields and still work. Does anyone even make a monk who's not dual-striking in some way anyway? But the lack of shields is some sort of "disadvantage".

It's debatable whether unarmed strike lets you dual-wield; even if you are allowed to do so, however, monks still suffer from poor BAB and low damage output. They don't get sneak attack, ki strike advances too slowly, and they can't power attack with their fists.

Their class features also pull them in two different directions - they are meant to be mobile (speed boost, tumble etc.) but flurry requires them to stand still. Then they just have random, strange abilities like Slow Fall and Quivering Palm that were added primarily for fluff reasons.


I think one thing got forgotten in this discussion: monks might not be "the most effective fighter ever invented" but they surely are cool to play and their special abilities enable them to simply to do many truely cool things in RP.

I agree that they are very cool (especially some of their PrCs.) 4e seems to have nice things in store for them by now making them innately psionic. :smallsmile:

[Snake-Aes]

Monk combat is not unlike "rogue - sneak attack". I think what annoys people the most is that they can't get magical equipment in the same ratio as other christmas trees get, and some of the class features are attainable by others more easily(like wizards and feather fall / dimension hop / etherealness).
Another grave factor is the stat distribution. You have one damage stat, one survival stat, one armor stat and one armor/special ability stat. CHA is the only stat a monk doesn't care much about, followed by INT.

There are workarounds, like pathfinder's where flurries are effectively full bab + two-weapon-combat, and special abilities are powered by a mystical supply of energy. Another good one is Tormenta's monk, which has a little more ac and shifts melee needs to either STR of DEX, based on a first level choice.


My better experiences with monk combat are on being the annoying jack-of-all-maneuvers. It's the guy that would sneak around, find the most troublesome enemies(casters, usually) and do their best to annoy them to no end. Grapples, trips, blocking LoS, soaking save spells...

[John Cribati]

Er... for the non D&D inclined... what is bab?

[Gandariel]

i think it's base attack bonus...
it's the bonus you get when you attack, and increases as you gain levels (depending on your class, a fighter will have a greater bab than a wizard obviously)

[Kish]

Base Attack Bonus, yes.

Roy's Base Attack Bonus is equal to his level--whenever he attacks with his greatsword, he rolls a 20-sided die and adds his level to the number (plus the +5 bonus for the +5 greatsword he now has, and so on). Belkar's, as a ranger/barbarian, is also equal to his level. Vaarsuvius' is equal to half his level, if s/he ever attacked with weapons, and when s/he makes ranged touch attacks with Disintegrate spells. Haley's is equal to 3/4 of her level; Elan's may also be equal to 3/4 of his level, but I suspect he gets fighter-level BAB for his Dashing Swordman levels, such that his BAB is equal to (3/4 of his Bard levels)+(his Dashing Swordman level).

Monks, despite being a class that seems, in terms of description, to be meant to compete with barbarians, paladins, and rangers in pure combat prowess, get 3/4 BAB.

[Captainocaptain]

Umm, why is everyone treating monks like they are front of the line fighters. Monks do not fit in any way to the Defender role. They are strikers pure and simple. Here's a fighters strategy: run into combat, get hit as little as possible and make sure the rest of the party is not going to die. Here's a monk: sneak around, find someone squishy looking(a caster usually), and full attack them from behind. Or Sneak around and flank the heavy fighting guy and now take potshots at him along with the rouge.

[Kish]

Gah, 4edspeak. :smalltongue:

[Boci]

Umm, why is everyone treating monks like they are front of the line fighters. Monks do not fit in any way to the Defender role. They are strikers pure and simple. Here's a fighters strategy: run into combat, get hit as little as possible and make sure the rest of the party is not going to die. Here's a monk: sneak around,

Whilst the rest of your party does what?


find someone squishy looking(a caster usually),

And pray he doesn't have mirror image or other defensive buffs.


and full attack them from behind. Or Sneak around and flank the heavy fighting guy and now take potshots at him along with the rouge.

Doing little damage. Kinda defeats the purpose of a striker.

[derfenrirwolv]

The problem with the idea of a monk as a striker is that they cant do any actual damage quickly. They can't move and full attack, so they're stuck hitting for a little bit of damage on the first round, and hitting again for an ok amount on the second.

Of course, rogues problem with being a striker is that everything and its brother is immune to sneak attacks either by being an undead, ooze, plant, elemental, more than 2 size catagories bigger than you, (you can only sneak attack it if you can reach a vital spot) or has uncanny dodge, concealment..

[Smiling Knight]

Aah, time for my weekly dose of people trying to defend the monk. It's like candy for the soul.

[Ancalagon]

If your DM is solving your class problems with fiat, then there's no need to discuss anything. Just have him make you an amulet with all the buffs you need and go naked. :smalltongue:

Hum... I think there's a difference between "one item to rule them all" and "one specific item for an specific task", no? ;)



Their class features also pull them in two different directions - they are meant to be mobile (speed boost, tumble etc.) but flurry requires them to stand still. Then they just have random, strange abilities like Slow Fall and Quivering Palm that were added primarily for fluff reasons.

I agree that they are very cool (especially some of their PrCs.) 4e seems to have nice things in store for them by now making them innately psionic. :smallsmile:

Actually, the second is the reason for the first: Someone saw an eastern and said "whooo, stuff like that is cool! I want such a char in D&D". Thus, Monk class was born.
He was never about being effective, but it's a class that lets you do all the cool things from those (semi-)magical kung-fu movies. In my book, that's a lot better than a rule-optimised fighter. ;)

[DavidBV]

Base Attack Bonus, yes.

Roy's Base Attack Bonus is equal to his level--whenever he attacks with his greatsword, he rolls a 20-sided die and adds his level to the number (plus the +5 bonus for the +5 greatsword he now has, and so on). Belkar's, as a ranger/barbarian, is also equal to his level. Vaarsuvius' is equal to half his level, if s/he ever attacked with weapons, and when s/he makes ranged touch attacks with Disintegrate spells. Haley's is equal to 3/4 of her level; Elan's may also be equal to 3/4 of his level, but I suspect he gets fighter-level BAB for his Dashing Swordman levels, such that his BAB is equal to (3/4 of his Bard levels)+(his Dashing Swordman level).

Monks, despite being a class that seems, in terms of description, to be meant to compete with barbarians, paladins, and rangers in pure combat prowess, get 3/4 BAB.

This is a problem in mid levels, but after some point AC stops scaling up in most enemies. Of course it's all up to the DM and the setting, but AC over 30 shouldn't be common, and best attack from a monk, plus enhanced strenght and other bonuses should hit reasonably well.

[Beowulf DW]

Aah, time for my weekly dose of people trying to defend the monk. It's like candy for the soul.

I'm not going to try to defend the monk class's abilities from a practical standpoint, but I will say that I'm having fun playing as one. And isn't that what matters in a game? Having fun? Sure, I might start having a hard time eventually, but there are ways to get around that without losing the spirit of the class and without getting to wild with multiclassing and PrCs.

More than the class, what's important to me is the concept of the monk: a magnificently powerful martial artist who fights with his bare hands and draws his power from the strength of his body and his mind, while everyone else is running around with magic weapons and world-shaking spells. How is that not awesome? More importantly, how is it that so few games (including D&D) have failed at pulling off this concept?

[Math_Mage]

I'm not going to try to defend the monk class's abilities from a practical standpoint, but I will say that I'm having fun playing as one. And isn't that what matters in a game? Having fun? Sure, I might start having a hard time eventually, but there are ways to get around that without losing the spirit of the class and without getting to wild with multiclassing and PrCs.

More than the class, what's important to me is the concept of the monk: a magnificently powerful martial artist who fights with his bare hands and draws his power from the strength of his body and his mind, while everyone else is running around with magic weapons and world-shaking spells. How is that not awesome? More importantly, how is it that so few games (including D&D) have failed at pulling off this concept?

Because magic weapons and world-shaking spells are so awesome it's really hard to make something equally awesome that eschews them as a class feature, without breaking the game. So they erred on the side--*far* on the side--of nerfdom. This is also what happens with Vow of Poverty, except that is actually supposed to be effective at lower levels.

[ericgrau]

Agreed. Miko had at least a couple of levels of Monk and she made good use of them in her fight with Roy after she Fell.

Although I think Rich's mocking of the class in OtOoPCs was pretty accurate...having a class designed to fight bare-handed and having them still deal more damage if they pick up a weapon is a bit daft, frankly.

Which is why you instead use monk to perform things like acrobatics, stunning kick and to dodge or resist spells like Miko did. Fighting bare handed (without stunning fists and so on) in a class that doesn't even require it is more of a player mistake. Either level 1 ability lets you avoid this, and they do get specially designated monk weapons too. Or else the class is a misleading trap since everyone expects to use it to throw punches and thus immediately ignores everything else.

Having Belkar mock them does represent a common viewpoint with some truth to it, yet Rich also demonstrates another viewpoint through Miko. As for his personal opinions, we can only speculate. Maybe he likes monk dips but not monks. Maybe he only likes them with certain play styles. Maybe he hated them but later accepted them (at least partly). Who knows.

[Optimystik]

Hum... I think there's a difference between "one item to rule them all" and "one specific item for an specific task", no? ;)

Well, monks do need more than one buff...

It's both offense and defense that they fail at, not just one.


Actually, the second is the reason for the first: Someone saw an eastern and said "whooo, stuff like that is cool! I want such a char in D&D". Thus, Monk class was born.
He was never about being effective, but it's a class that lets you do all the cool things from those (semi-)magical kung-fu movies. In my book, that's a lot better than a rule-optimised fighter. ;)

And then someone came along later, saw the same wuxia influence, and said "Wow, it would be awesome to have a character in D&D that could actually do this stuff."

Thus the Swordsage was born. :smalltongue:

[Beowulf DW]

Because magic weapons and world-shaking spells are so awesome it's really hard to make something equally awesome that eschews them as a class feature, without breaking the game. So they erred on the side--*far* on the side--of nerfdom. This is also what happens with Vow of Poverty, except that is actually supposed to be effective at lower levels.

I understand the desire to not break the game, but...can't restrictions and prerecquisites be placed on class features and feats to keep them from breaking the game?

[DavidBV]

I'm not going to try to defend the monk class's abilities from a practical standpoint, but I will say that I'm having fun playing as one. And isn't that what matters in a game? Having fun? Sure, I might start having a hard time eventually, but there are ways to get around that without losing the spirit of the class and without getting to wild with multiclassing and PrCs.

More than the class, what's important to me is the concept of the monk: a magnificently powerful martial artist who fights with his bare hands and draws his power from the strength of his body and his mind, while everyone else is running around with magic weapons and world-shaking spells. How is that not awesome? More importantly, how is it that so few games (including D&D) have failed at pulling off this concept?

Yes, I think this brings the real point about monks: they are fun and different.

Certainly, they were not needed for the game. You could make a figther specialized in hand to hand, just a few new rules here and some new feats there and the monk class would not be needed. But the same could be said about a Barbarian: add feats for Rage and Damage reduction and let them be figthers too. Would make sense.

There are some players however that, for different reasons, are happy with a character that doesn't require a careful optimization every time you level: it just improves by itself. I have never played a Monk or Barbarian in a pen and paper game, and it doesn't really tempt me, even if I usually play melee characters. However I always remember monks adding to the group both in utility and roleplaying.

[Beowulf DW]

Yes, I think this brings the real point about monks: they are fun and different.

Certainly, they were not needed for the game. You could make a figther specialized in hand to hand, just a few new rules here and some new feats there and the monk class would not be needed. But the same could be said about a Barbarian: add feats for Rage and Damage reduction and let them be figthers too. Would make sense.

There are some players however that, for different reasons, are happy with a character that doesn't require a careful optimization every time you level: it just improves by itself. I have never played a Monk or Barbarian in a pen and paper game, and it doesn't really tempt me, even if I usually play melee characters. However I always remember monks adding to the group both in utility and roleplaying.

I think that each of the base classes was made to embody a certain archtype found in fantasy literature and mythology. Each class has a certain flavor to it. They might not be necessary to the game, but they certainly do make it fun.

Monks have always appealed to me because, for whatever reason, they just don't really fit into the traditional roles to which most classes are usually assigned. As you said, they're just different.

[Boci]

Thus the Swordsage was born. :smalltongue:

And people went: "Look swordsage, you either get supplied flavour and useless mechanical abilities, or bland flavour and mechanically effective abilities. You cannot have both, that is too much awesomeness for one class."

And thus many ToB thread were born.

[warrl]

EDIT: maybe she (Miko) is unarmored? not sure really. Interesting concept then, but still of dubious optimization, as I doubt the AC bonus from Wis plus a high Dex bonus can be better than a magical full plate. Unless she has 11 levels in monk, which would certainly make things interesting... but unlikely that she's so high level.

With just some slightly different build choices, my 4E fighter|ranger could have had plate-equivalent AC while wearing hide armor, at level 1; as is, that won't happen until level 11, and hide won't be better until level 18 (currently I have chain-equivalent AC). But the character would lose some damage bonuses in plate armor.

As for magical armor, there is also clothing with AC-boosting magic.

So, Miko having plate-armor-like AC in light or no armor? No problem. BETTER than plate, if she gets a Wis bonus too (that she wouldn't get in plate).

[Acero]

With just some slightly different build choices, my 4E fighter|ranger could have had plate-equivalent AC while wearing hide armor, at level 1; as is, that won't happen until level 11, and hide won't be better until level 18 (currently I have chain-equivalent AC). But the character would lose some damage bonuses in plate armor.

As for magical armor, there is also clothing with AC-boosting magic.

So, Miko having plate-armor-like AC in light or no armor? No problem. BETTER than plate, if she gets a Wis bonus too (that she wouldn't get in plate).

I'm pretty sure Miko doesn't have high WIS

[talkamancer]

We had fighter, thief, assassin, magic user, cleric and paladin. All these new fangled classes, what have they done to my lovely game.:smalleek:

[El Llamita]

Rich=/=Belkar.

What does that mean?

[hamishspence]

It means Rich is not equal to Belkar: Just because Belkar thinks monks are pointless, doesn't mean Rich does.

[Kish]

Belkar, not Rich, laughed at the monk class concept in On the Origins of PCs.

"Assume Character X is Rich's mouthpiece" is something that happens way too often on this board; I would say that even if none of the moderators had ever posted that Rich is really strict about what a character says being what the character thinks, not Rich. But since one did post that a long time ago, I say that "'Assume Character X is Rich's mouthpiece' is something that happens way too often on this board" louder than I otherwise would.

[Kobold-Bard]

I'm pretty sure Miko doesn't have high WIS

Higher than Belkar (who admittedly has a Modifier Penalty).

[Ancalagon]

Well, monks do need more than one buff...

It's both offense and defense that they fail at, not just one.

I said: "Well, monks have their armour built in."
You said: "Yes, correct, but they don't have special armour-enchancements."
I said: "If the fighter has a piece of clothing (armour) that does armour + special, then the monk can get a piece of cloth that does not add armour, but only the special".

That was our context.

As I pointed out, it does not matter the monk fails all of them. Some of the issues can be fixed (see above), while the remaining ones don't matter that much anymore if you have the "correct" style of play.

If you have a powergamer-DM where it DOES matter that Class A has a bit more sucky BAB than Class B, then I'd simply ask him to get house rules so I can actually "powergame" as he and the players apparently wish it. I think that powergamers should have at least fun to enabling the rules for a balanced powergaming than with playing that powergame. It's part of the whole "thing". Don't just Hack & Slay, you have to LIVE being a geek if that's your thing.

After all the things I wrote I don't have to point out I'd not be playing with such a group in the first place, but that seems besides the point. ;)

[Ancalagon]

What does that mean?

It's an attempt to emulate a "does not equal" in ascii. This one is meant: ≠