Monk Junk (consolidated monk discussion)

[Master_Rahl22]

It continues to amaze me that a large part of Giacomo's reason that Monks are awesome is that spells that they can't cast can really help them. That's like looking to buy a new computer, and asking the salesman if a particular laptop can access wifi, then he says, "Nope, but if you can get your friends to loan you a wireless internet card then it can!" Anybody's laptop could access wifi if you have friends that are willing to spend their time and money to make your computer better, just as any melee class can benefit from buff spells. Monks don't gain any super cool extra benefits from those buff spells that another class wouldn't gain.

I love the idea of Monks, it's just that the majority of the reasons that even Giacomo gives that Monks are good (bonus feats, flurry, speed, damage dice) can be gained from a 2 level dip in Monk (for 2 bonus feats) and a PrC that advances flurry, speed, and damage dice. When you can get everything that makes a Monk good with only 2 levels, that would seem to imply that the other 18 kinda suck.

[Piedmon_Sama]

I've always allowed the monk in my campaigns to flurry on a partial action. In fact, I did that for years without realizing it was supposed to be full-attack only from reading this board. When I learned the truth, I was like "well the class really needs all it can get anyway" and didn't change a thing.

[Mystic Muse]

........I've created a Monster haven't I?

[lsfreak]

........I've created a Monster haven't I?

Don't worry, all monk threads pretty much end up like this. Except for that dragon-versus-beguiler thing, that was unusual.

[Lycanthromancer]

Don't worry, all monk threads pretty much end up like this. Except for that dragon-versus-beguiler thing, that was unusual.And it would've been nice had it had continued. It was probably the most interesting thing I've read on a monk-related thread yet.

Except for call weaponry. It's like being a druid, except your aminal [sic] companion is full of suck.

[Pluto]

I've played with lots of Monks straight out of the can. In low optimization settings, they've never seemed any better or any worse than any other class.

I've played 3.X in two groups where optimization was a very real concern, and neither noticeably houseruled Monks. Players knew what they were getting into and just didn't take levels in the class unless it would benefit their builds.

So, yeah. All the "fix the Monk" threads seem a bit silly to me. If the Monk is weak, just use a different class to model the archetype. 3.5 is bloated with enough reduntant classes and feats that it's no challenge to pull that off.

[Jarrick]

As it's been posted, an unmodified monk isn't bad at all if you don't have optimizers in the party.

I overlooked this earlier. I just wanted to thank you. You've restored my faith in this forum. There is much wisdom here.

Edit: You too pluto

[Pyron]

I once played an unmodified monk... in the second round of combat, I was rolling up a new character.

[ZeroNumerous]

Why is it so hard to believe that a straight Monk can be a powerful character?

Because you're not providing proof for your statement. We used a gauntlet of ten encounters that a level 5 character should have a fifty percent success rate on. The monk's success rate is roughly twenty to thirty percent. This is an objective fact in support of the idea that monks are subpar characters. To take your statement into account you would need to provide proof aside from your own testimony, and you have failed to do thusly.

Further, your statement is inconsistent in two of your examples:


One went from 1 to 23, ... and one from 1 to 17, all were straight Monks, no VoP, core only.

1-23 Monk: Rogue, going into the Dashing Swordsman, Druid/Warmage/Geomancer, Ranger/Green Knight, straight Wizard.

1-17 Monk: Sorcerer, Rogue/Scout (who may have been the more MVP party member in that game), Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue.

Emphasis mine on non-core material.

I simply do not believe your account is accurate to the events that happened, nor to the builds utilized by the rest of the group.

[sonofzeal]

And it would've been nice had it had continued. It was probably the most interesting thing I've read on a monk-related thread yet.

Except for call weaponry. It's like being a druid, except your aminal [sic] companion is full of suck.
The psi power? For 525 gp a shot, a Psi character can use a powerstone to grab themselves a +5 weapon that way. Or 575 for an Extended one. If you don't use a weapon all the time (many Gish builds, for example), then this can be a valuable cost-saver to crank out some big guns when needed, at a low enough level where a +5 Greatsword is still a thing of terror. A scroll of Greater Magic Weapon costs three times as much, and you need to provide your own sword.. which does allow for some cool stuff (get all special properties, and top off with GMW), but you are paying for it by tripling the price, so that balances.

And snapping your fingers and summoning a massive glowing sword of +5 smitage? Epic awesomeness.

[Kylarra]

Just to play devil's advocate for a bit, not to be confused with the poster who has the same name and often plays his namesake, I don't see why you refuse to take his testimony at face value. It is massively arrogant to claim that a monk cannot be a powerful character, relative to the rest of their party.

A gauntlet of 10 encounters when we all know CR is a joke proves that in a vacuum the monk may not be best at handling things head to head. So that no one will call me on this, I am agreeing with this sentiment for the sake of argument. Please don't cite this in response to this post.

This does not disprove things that happen in real life games.

Theorycraft is a wonderful thing for theorizing, not so much for disproving things that are actually happening. Are there extenuating circumstances? Probably, but the statement you are making is an unqualified denial of the ability of a player to play a monk well and to make better use of its abilities than other players at the table, and I find that to be an exceedingly arrogant claim.

[The Glyphstone]

Just to play devil's advocate for a bit, not to be confused with the poster who has the same name and often plays his namesake, I don't see why you refuse to take his testimony at face value. It is massively arrogant to claim that a monk cannot be a powerful character, relative to the rest of their party.

A gauntlet of 10 encounters when we all know CR is a joke proves that in a vacuum the monk may not be best at handling things head to head. So that no one will call me on this, I am agreeing with this sentiment for the sake of argument. Please don't cite this in response to this post.

This does not disprove things that happen in real life games.

Theorycraft is a wonderful thing for theorizing, not so much for disproving things that are actually happening. Are there extenuating circumstances? Probably, but the statement you are making is an unqualified denial of the ability of a player to play a monk well and to make better use of its abilities than other players at the table, and I find that to be an exceedingly arrogant claim.

Except that we know what the other characters are, and to a lesser extent, the players. By any standards barring phenomenal incompetence (which is both rude to assume, and unlikely considering one of them is a 'skilled optimizer', compared to the 'new player' handling the monk), they should have far outpaced the monk.
We know (vaguely) the sort of situations and fights they did...the monk should not have been able to contribute on the level anyone else had the potential to.

It's arrogant to assume that someone can't win at blackjack. It's not arrogant to assume that a professional cardshark (optimizer with a good melee class) will consistently lose hands to the newbie who's never played blackjack before (the player new to D&D) and struggles with sums he can't count up on his fingers (the mechanical ability of the monk). It's just so incredibly unrealistic that we do indeed ask for an explanation of the circumstances to find out why probability decided to take a vacation here.

[ZeroNumerous]

..., I don't see why you refuse to take his testimony at face value.

Inaccuracies in his statement. Whether it is arrogant or not, does that make his internally inconsistent statement above reproach? No. Any perceived arrogance on my part is irrelevant when faced with an inconsistent statement that needs to be put to the question.


This does not disprove things that happen in real life games.

But it does prove that such things do not normally happen without external influence. In a vacuum, the monk does not win the normal fifty percent of the time. Therefore, for the monk to actively contribute his fifty percent there must be something acting upon the monk or upon his opposition that empowers the monk or depowers his enemies. This means that his fifty percent is being partially covered by external forces and is not intrinsic to the monk and adds nothing to the worth of the monk.


Probably, but the statement you are making is an unqualified denial of the ability of a player to play a monk well and to make better use of its abilities than other players at the table, and I find that to be an exceedingly arrogant claim.

Not quite. My refusal is to accept his claim that a pure monk can be a powerful character without external influence. My statement was to this effect. Either his recollection of the events of the game or the build of those he played with were wrong. His claim is that the monk presented proved exceptional in a pure Core game(which is objectively false if there were Scouts, Green Knights, Dashing Swordsmen(which is also homebrew), Warmages or Geomancers) and whilst unbuffed.

[Lycanthromancer]

The psi power? For 525 gp a shot, a Psi character can use a powerstone to grab themselves a +5 weapon that way. Or 575 for an Extended one. If you don't use a weapon all the time (many Gish builds, for example), then this can be a valuable cost-saver to crank out some big guns when needed, at a low enough level where a +5 Greatsword is still a thing of terror. A scroll of Greater Magic Weapon costs three times as much, and you need to provide your own sword.. which does allow for some cool stuff (get all special properties, and top off with GMW), but you are paying for it by tripling the price, so that balances.

And snapping your fingers and summoning a massive glowing sword of +5 smitage? Epic awesomeness.Or just use call weaponry to pull in a monk, since his whole body is technically a weapon.

Though I would imagine that a +5 sword would be much more useful. :smallamused:

[Leon]

Yes.

I have played a Monk it was good but was in a short lived game so i didn't get to fully explore the class but Ive no problem with the class over all from a theoretical view.

Currently have to Monks in the game that i play a Archivist in - one is a Halfling with a couple levels of the racial sub but otherwise a normal monk, the other is a Human with one lvl of Rogue who is focused on tripping things.

the Human one is only a recent addition to the group and untested but the Halfling has been well proven in combat and recon for a long time now.

[faceroll]

I have to imagine favourable houserules, or something else really weird going on.

What made him so effective? What was he actually contributing to the party that nobody else was?

Maybe they're playing wrong.


My assumption would be that the group is low on the optimization scale. No power attack boosting, getting full-attack sneak attacks would be rare, casters spend most of their times tossing fireballs, druid plays as more of a healer or blaster than rawrimeatingyourfaceoff, and so on. In such a situation, I could see monks appearing to be very good, because no one is pushing their character to their full, optimized potential. Not saying that's a bad thing, but saying that in those specific circumstances with that particular group, the monk might pull ahead.

I am suspecting the same.

[Kaiyanwang]

........I've created a Monster haven't I?

The golden rule is:

Never start a thread that rhymes with "Bonk" and/or with "Blizzard".

Jokes aside, yes, monk is not that power, expecially for 20 level.

Nevertheless, I found it cool if played by an imaginative character, and in difficult scenario where you have to stay naked, infiltrate as a slave or so.

If equipped very difficult to kill, and in a campaign that is not only "kill those mob. done. next" can lead to interesting tactics.

Finally, is quite great in gestalt. Think about kung fu genius + wujen and wis monk + cloistered cleric.

Fun, Flavourful and Full Caster, after all.


Aaaand, I would ask: since when play unoptimized, considerng that the mere concept optimization could vary from individual to individual, is play the game wrong?

[lord_khaine]

I have played several unmodified monks, the only one that have had any problems was the first 3.0 monk, and that was because i was on about 1/3 the WBL of the rest of the party, due to a unexperienced gm.

[Powerfamiliar]

Had a monk in my last campaign. Party was not optimized so he more than held his own. The monk player was probably the most experienced player at the table, so that probably helped too. Will probably have a PF monk in my next campaign later this month.

[Kaiyanwang]

One of my players played an unmodofied monk for a long campaign.

Playable, after all. And high survivability. Didn't shine so many times (even if at epic with vorpal hands, 18-20 additional attack threat + FAQs interpretation of TWF, and infinite deflection of spells was quite awesome).

He was not so effective, but I generally think that if a PC is ineffective, you have first to see the player "noobness" and ingenuity, then the build, and then the class. And see how the DM plays too.

Consider that the less effective PC in that campaign, barring the last part (later epic, she finially skilled) was the Druid (sigh).

At present time, I see it as a great support in gestalt builds. Luckily, I know the system quite, but I don't play so optimized.

[Ossian]

Indeed i do. The only modification is that, provided a good background/narrative justification and that they continue practicing the skills and following the ethics of the class at hand, they can muticlass pretty much at leisure.

It never happened, but just for the sake of exemplification, if a Sorcerer PC entered the monastery and at the same time continued to study magic and practice kung fu, I would have no qualms in letting her multicalss.

One of the most senior character in our champaign is now Monk 13 / Ranger (planar variant) 1, with just a few options from Unearthed Arcana.

An NPC who has been around just as long is a Barbarian 2/Monk 8/Darvish 4/Exotic Weapon Master 2/Fighter 2 with a few tweaks from Oriental Adventures.

Both fun to play, and they get tons of spotlight when they kick b**t.

When everyone draws a flaming sword or a staff of the magi and you just crack your knuckles, that demands some respect :)

M.

[Ashiel]

Supposed you keep the monk as it is, but add a Psychic Warriors manifesting ability (and limit the power list to psychokinesis, psychometabolism, and psychoportation).
Would that make a balanced class, or would that be too much?

You don't even have to change a thing. It allows a lot of cool variety with monks. By using the existing psychic warrior manifesting (Wisdom based, same PP progression, same power list), you can acquire a number of powers which adequately synergize with the monk's existing features (Grip of Iron helps grappling, Inertial Armor buffs AC, there's a number of both weapon and natural attack enhancing powers). Psychic warriors don't receive a lot of blasting powers by default naturally but can pick up some Psion powers like Energy Burst or Energy Bolt with the Expanded Knowledge feat. Both methods work wonderfully for simulating a monk who can throw fire or lightning from their hands with the power of their chi/ki; while it being something that not all monks get by default.

Compare these options to the ki-blast themed feats in the PHB-II, and you find that the 3.5 Psionics system not only fits it better thematically, but it fits it better mechanically as well. You also end up with a better ki-point system than the Pathfinder monk does; and you get cool thematic powers like Catfall (which allows you to recover from a trip or fall on your feet automatically, as well as reduce falling damage by 10ft / PP spent - PERFECT for a monk).

Also powers such as Vigor help offset the monk's squishy-ness, but only temporarily and at the cost of ki/chi that he could use for other things. I'm telling you it's beautiful. :smallsmile:

Since using this in our games, the monk has been far better. The monk can hold his own, is less MAD (Wisdom is your baby - love it always), and more capable at doing various non-direct combat things. They can pickup powers such as Catfall (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/catfall.htm), Conceal Thoughts (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/concealThoughts.htm),Burst (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/burst.htm), Defensive Precognition (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/precognitionDefensive.htm), Offensive Precognition (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/precognitionOffensive.htm), Offensive Prescience (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/prescienceOffensive.htm), Skate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/skate.htm), Synesthete (you can fight in the dark!) (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/synesthete.htm), Thicken Skin (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/thickenSkin.htm), and Vigor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/vigor.htm).

All of these powers can mechanically describe a lot of cool cinematic super-martial artist traits, tricks, techniques, and so forth. And those are all just from the level 1 power list. Most of them can be augmented, allowing them to scale with your level at the cost of increase ki/chi expenditure (but you have more Ki/Chi at higher levels - balance! :smallbiggrin:).

That's not to mention the awesome Psionic Feats (http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/psionicFeats.htm) that this opens up for monks; many of which actually have very heavy monk-ish themes (like Up the Walls (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#upTheWalls)).

:smallsmile:

[Tyndmyr]

True, and the PF one is noticeably stronger.

Okay, well, one of our players did play a multiclass monk in our 3.5 RHoD game - I think it was something like monk 2 / fighter 4, using the monk levels to pick up bonus feats, better saves, and Evasion. Reasonably effective.

In fairness, it's not the only noticeably stronger class in PF...all the melee classes generally got new toys. Im not sure that it's a comparative difference, though.

Multiclass monk is an entirely different beast. Like fighter, it's a great dipping class, but less impressive taken alone.

I have seen people do straight monk(we house rule unarmed proficiency, because otherwise it's just lame, and that was probably an oversight anyhow). Invariably, they involve something interesting like multiclassing or drunken master to wield ridiculously large improvised weapons and such. Monk makes a fine base for an idea, but you shouldn't stay in the class any longer than you have to.

[Indon]

I've played unmodified monks. In fact, I've never played in a campaign that houseruled them, though I have played in campaigns where they weren't allowed for flavor reasons.

I've never been in a group that plays 3.x D&D remotely like you'd think it's played based on a D&D forum on the internet - though I was going to DM such a group once, I never got much player interest.


I do feel you misrepresent my stance. I'm trying to say that in addition to being able to survive, you should also be able to contribute.

'cause if you don't deal enough DPS, the group will totally kick you.

[Indon]

We didn't have any houserules and everyone was contributing. Why is it so hard to believe that a straight Monk can be a powerful character? The best Monk was played by a veteran player, he'd been playing DnD for about 15 years, but even the newb, who played the 1-23 Monk, was still one of the best played/most powerful characters in the party.

Because years of a small group of people talking themselves in circles has convinced that group that there is only one way D&D can be played, and that all other groups are playing imperfect or houseruled versions of it.
(It's their way, FYI)
The easy way to get the forum to accept it is to come to their inevitable conclusion for them, "Oh, well, you see, the Monk was the only competent/optimizing player in the group," and then they'll smile and nod and ignore you because now they've slotted your experience in with their expectations.

But you aren't going to change those expectations anyway, so I wouldn't bother.

[Sliver]

Indon - When someone asks for the reason that stands behind your claim and the answer is "It's just like that, why can't you accept it?" it won't convince most people. With the many threads that come up constantly and live long and get many calculated and based responses to pro-monks, you would think that people don't just ignore and nod politely to those that make the claims, but also that the claimers fail to bring good proof due to lack of it.

[Indon]

Indon - When someone asks for the reason that stands behind your claim and the answer is "It's just like that, why can't you accept it?" it won't convince most people.

There is more in D&D than is dreamt of in internet theorycrafting.

The fact is that not every D&D game is going to turn out the same - there are a lot of factors, mechanical and otherwise, and a wide diversity of many of those factors.

And if you'll note, I'm not telling him he should bother to be convincing - rather, I'm telling him he shouldn't bother.

[Emmerask]

I never saw medium bab as a major downside.

A level 10 monk has 7/7/2 while the fighter has 10/5
With stats equip and feats it should be something around 16/16/11

Most Cr10 enemies have from 17 to 24 AC so even without buffs you have a decent shot to hit with your first two attacks and the last attack will hit from time to time too and that is without buffs , haste, heroes feast and others will increase your tohit to ~90% against most enemies.

The main issue with monks is that there is really no good reason to stay monk for more then a few levels when other classes or prcs offer much more synergy then you could get with the monk features at higher levels.

Nearly any class/prc you can take will give you features/spells/stuff^^ that is better then anything you can get if you stay monk. While this dpoes hold true for most (if not all classes) the gap between staying monk or choosing something else is far greater then most other classes.

[Sliver]

There is more in D&D than is dreamt of in internet theorycrafting.

The fact is that not every D&D game is going to turn out the same - there are a lot of factors, mechanical and otherwise, and a wide diversity of many of those factors.

And if you'll note, I'm not telling him he should bother to be convincing - rather, I'm telling him he shouldn't bother.

... That has nothing to do with what is at hand..

He said they worked in his group, without handwaving rules or having other houserules. It was asked then what made the monk work for them. He avoided the question with "it just did".

No one is saying that monks won't work for any group, or that they can't be fixed. The thing that is discussed is if they deliver compared to other classes in a vacuum. If you need high optimization, houserules, other players not knowing to play well or a game that focuses on allowing the monk to shine on expanse of other classes, you aren't arguing for monks but for your monks.

If the claim is that monks worked without all that, then bringing up the reasons shouldn't be a problem, right? Some might actually want to read that, you know? I for one, would really want to hear that there is real hope that as they are, they can be good compared to the other classes, without needing to modify the game or anything. But just "just believe me" or "LEAVE MONKS ALONE" won't be enough.

[Indon]

The main issue with monks is that there is really no good reason to stay monk for more then a few levels when other classes or prcs offer much more synergy then you could get with the monk features at higher levels.

Well, that's certainly an issue, one that many classes of varying power levels have across the game (such as Sorceror).

The biggest issue, power-wise, with Monks is that they don't have access to a system of spellcasting or that emulates spellcasting, but that's a fairly common disadvantage.

Edit: Sliver, you seem to be assuming that I'm interested in having this conversation with yet another person. You assume incorrectly. I wonder, in fact, why you would assume that since I had just advised someone else not to bother with the same.

[Greenish]

cool thematic powers like Catfall (which allows you to recover from a trip or fall on your feet automatically, as well as reduce falling damage by 10ft / PP spent - PERFECT for a monk).You can recover from trip with catfall? I never thought of that, but it does say "you land on your feet no matter how far you fall". Hmm, nifty. :smallcool:

To add to your list of cool powers, Hustle and Psionic Lion's Charge allow monks to use that speed of theirs and still get off full attacks. Hammer allows you to make d8 damage touch attacks, which is pretty nifty at lower levels with flurry.

It's all cool, but it makes monk essentially a gestalt.

[Sliver]

Edit: Sliver, you seem to be assuming that I'm interested in having this conversation with yet another person. You assume incorrectly. I wonder, in fact, why you would assume that since I had just advised someone else not to bother with the same.

I don't care about discussing it with you. You advice someone that claims that he has good experiences with the monk to not attempt to share them, because your own experiences dictate that it won't change anything. Like I said, some people actually want to hear that..

[Emmerask]

Well, that's certainly an issue, one that many classes of varying power levels have across the game (such as Sorceror).

The biggest issue, power-wise, with Monks is that they don't have access to a system of spellcasting or that emulates spellcasting, but that's a fairly common disadvantage.


Well it is true that this is an issue with most base classes, I do think the monk has drawn the short end of the stick there. Fighters for example do get bonus feats, sorcerers while not great still get new spells ^^.The list of monk class features certainly is long but the things they get are for the most part mediocre at best.

In a low optimization group though I do think that even a pure monk can hold his own and contribute a good deal to fights.

[Indon]

I don't care about discussing it with you. You advice someone that claims that he has good experiences with the monk to not attempt to share them, because your own experiences dictate that it won't change anything. Like I said, some people actually want to hear that..

And he's been sharing. But I don't imagine he's going to provide the combat log from all his previous campaigns so that this forum can parse it to the degree they'll insist they need.


Well it is true that this is an issue with most base classes, I do think the monk has drawn the short end of the stick there. Fighters for example do get bonus feats, sorcerers while not great still get new spells ^^.The list of monk class features certainly is long but the things they get are for the most part mediocre at best.

In a low optimization group though I do think that even a pure monk can hold his own and contribute a good deal to fights.

Er, my point was that there are a lot of classes which encourage people to jump out because they can still get what they want out of the base class while going elsewhere.

For instance, with Sorceror, any arcane full-casting PrC advances the Sorceror's most important class feature, being their casting, while giving you new stuff as well. So there's little mechanical reason not to be a casting PrC as a Sorceror, once you can be.

[Emmerask]

Er, my point was that there are a lot of classes which encourage people to jump out because they can still get what they want out of the base class while going elsewhere.

For instance, with Sorceror, any arcane full-casting PrC advances the Sorceror's most important class feature, being their casting, while giving you new stuff as well. So there's little mechanical reason not to be a casting PrC as a Sorceror, once you can be.

Oh okay, sorry had some kind of brain freeze there :smallbiggrin:
Well yes you are right its an issue for most classes

[lsfreak]

'cause if you don't deal enough DPS, the group will totally kick you.

No, but if you can't hold your weight, there's not IC-reason for the group to keep you around. A liability is a liability.

[Kaiyanwang]

Most Cr10 enemies have from 17 to 24 AC so even without buffs you have a decent shot to hit with your first two attacks



People tend to forget that the last iterative can even be used for touch attacks (trip as an example) quickdraw and throw something like a flashtone, or, if the to-hit is ginormous at high levels, to sunder or disarm a worn object.

[AtwasAwamps]

'cause if you don't deal enough DPS, the group will totally kick you.

Hooray! Arbitrary video game reference complete. Is anyone else playing "Monk Thread Bingo"?

I think if we can manipulate this into a 15-page discussion of the Stormwind Fallacy, I get a yacht.

On-topic, I would never play a straight unmodified monk, though I would take the occasional monk level here and there for certain builds. We do have someone playing an unmodified monk in a game I'm in, though, and he's highly effective because of a house-ruled modified item (fiery handwraps) and because he's our resident dice-witch (high stat rolls, constant high rolls in combat and for skill checks).

[Gametime]

Because years of a small group of people talking themselves in circles has convinced that group that there is only one way D&D can be played, and that all other groups are playing imperfect or houseruled versions of it.


I've never once seen any of the hardcore theorycrafters on this forum tell someone they were playing the game wrong.

I've frequently seen them comment that someone's perception of the overall structure of D&D was incomplete, and then be accused of telling people how to play the game.

For whatever reason, a lot of people seem quick to go on the defensive and insist that they are playing the game the right way even if the discussion has nothing to do with telling them it was the wrong way.

[Ashiel]

You can recover from trip with catfall? I never thought of that, but it does say "you land on your feet no matter how far you fall". Hmm, nifty. :smallcool:

To add to your list of cool powers, Hustle and Psionic Lion's Charge allow monks to use that speed of theirs and still get off full attacks. Hammer allows you to make d8 damage touch attacks, which is pretty nifty at lower levels with flurry.

It's all cool, but it makes monk essentially a gestalt.

Eh...sort of, but not really. It's more like a variant. The psychic warrior sports equipment, bonus psionic feats, and different options than a monk possesses. It's more like making a different kind of psychic warrior. Instead of weapons, armor, shields, bonus psionic feats (which are actually pretty awesome for a psychic warrior) and stuff like that, you're instead getting "monk"; which as has been pointed out is fairly mediocre.

Somehow it manages to remain pretty even for both of them power-wise, while allowing for a very wide range of flavors between the two. Not that it's not like a gestalt/character at first glance; but when you look at the monk as maybe 50-75% actual character class, then throw on the psi-warrior manifesting it brings it up to a 100% or maybe even 110% class. :smallsmile:

[Sir Giacomo]

It continues to amaze me that a large part of Giacomo's reason that Monks are awesome is that spells that they can't cast can really help them.

An occasionally arising misperception. The opposite is true.
I did a whole UMD monk build proving that yes, of course a monk can have all the buffs and spells necessary that synergise greatly with his class abilities, independent from casters in the group.
Then, have a look at the build examples I provided above - none have any spells cast, only enlarge (quite a common buff for melees I daresay). And that is taken from the monk's own money.


That's like looking to buy a new computer, and asking the salesman if a particular laptop can access wifi, then he says, "Nope, but if you can get your friends to loan you a wireless internet card then it can!" Anybody's laptop could access wifi if you have friends that are willing to spend their time and money to make your computer better, just as any melee class can benefit from buff spells. Monks don't gain any super cool extra benefits from those buff spells that another class wouldn't gain.

The major flaw of your picture is that is that a monk has different class features than other melee classes, and thus different strengths&weaknesses.

Example 1: an enlarge buff helps him greatly, while it is not so great for a rogue. Plus, an enlarge buff helps him more than other melee classes since his unarmed damage gets the biggest boost and he most likely has the special combat maneuver feats (improved grapple, combat reflexes and improved trip) which all get boosted by the enlarge buff.
Example 2: mage armour greatly benefits him while the armour-wearing melee classes do not get much out of it (apart from help vs incorporal attacks).

To use your picture:
- imagine asking the salesman that you intend to buy a personal computer and would wish to watch a DVD from time to time with it.
- your friends could lend you one with a great movie, but another friend would also like to see it. However, you would make much better use out of it in certain situations than said friend who just has a laptop with smaller screen. In other situations, the DVD is best lent to the laptop owner (say, on a journey). It all depends
- and, of course, being your friends they do not mind at all lending you the DVD - because they know you helped them when they moved. Or just because (they are friends...):smallsmile:


I love the idea of Monks, it's just that the majority of the reasons that even Giacomo gives that Monks are good (bonus feats, flurry, speed, damage dice) can be gained from a 2 level dip in Monk (for 2 bonus feats) and a PrC that advances flurry, speed, and damage dice. When you can get everything that makes a Monk good with only 2 levels, that would seem to imply that the other 18 kinda suck.

A two-level-dip is OK for many builds, but will cost you:
- unarmed damage progression (which gets better, the higher the level - non-core has some more ways apart from monk's belt to overcome this to a certain degree)
- extra flurry attack and attack penalty reduction
- another (key) bonus feat (improved trip in core)
- and a bunch of quite a lot of different abilities (for instance, spell resistance).
- so, again, it all depends on what you wish to achieve with the build.

- Giacomo

[Sinfire Titan]

Example 1: an enlarge buff helps him greatly, while it is not so great for a rogue. Plus, an enlarge buff helps him more than other melee classes since his unarmed damage gets the biggest boost and he most likely has the special combat maneuver feats (improved grapple, combat reflexes and improved trip) which all get boosted by the enlarge buff.

BS. Rogues are not a combat class, they are a skill monkey with a combat class feature.

Enlarge helps a Fighter just as much as it helps a Monk. Hell, Enlarge Person (the very spell you cite) can't affect a 20th level Monk (Outsider, not Human). And all of the feats you just listed can be obtained by a 1st level Fighter. Hell, they even skip Improved Grapple because Spiked Chains are better.


Furthermore, you keep using Core as your defense. The OP never specified Core (it was a later poster who's argument has been proven invalid).

[Sir Giacomo]

BS. Rogues are not a combat class, they are a skill monkey with a combat class feature.

That is your view. You can easily make a very combat-oriented rogue, though.


Enlarge helps a Fighter just as much as it helps a Monk.

No, because his damage does not stack as much with size gain as it does for the monk.


Hell, Enlarge Person (the very spell you cite) can't affect a 20th level Monk (Outsider, not Human).

So, levels 1-19 the monk makes better use of it (not counting a permanent enlarge which would still work when being cast before attaining level 20 I guess). I think that's enough to support my point: monks make better use of enlarge than fighters.


And all of the feats you just listed can be obtained by a 1st level Fighter.

Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Grapple, Expertise, Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes? 5 feats? All at level 1? I do not think this is possible for a fighter (barring flaws etc, highly campaign-specific).
But of course the fighter can take them in the first levels - but then suffers from MAD (while the monk can get those feats without prereqs).


Hell, they even skip Improved Grapple because Spiked Chains are better.

Could be. Depends. (for instance, a tumbling grappler would be a problem for a spiked chain wielder...etc.)


Furthermore, you keep using Core as your defense. The OP never specified Core (it was a later poster who's argument has been proven invalid).

I do not use core as my defense, but only specify whether for a certain argument I refer to core or not. Non-core makes class capabilities and comparisons very, very campaign-specific.
Thus, only if the OP specifies a non-core environment of a certain kind and the discussion focuses on that I would usually not refer to core only rulesset.

- Giacomo

[PhoenixRivers]

An occasionally arising misperception. The opposite is true.
I did a whole UMD monk build proving that yes, of course a monk can have all the buffs and spells necessary that synergise greatly with his class abilities, independent from casters in the group.
Then, have a look at the build examples I provided above - none have any spells cast, only enlarge (quite a common buff for melees I daresay). And that is taken from the monk's own money.And yet, no solid answer was given for how a monk is supposed to keep WBL on par with the rest of his party, when 90% of it's spent on consumables.


Example 1: an enlarge buff helps him greatly, while it is not so great for a rogue. Plus, an enlarge buff helps him more than other melee classes since his unarmed damage gets the biggest boost and he most likely has the special combat maneuver feats (improved grapple, combat reflexes and improved trip) which all get boosted by the enlarge buff.
I'd be willing to bet money that enlarge helps a reach weapon tripper more than it helps a monk. Much more.

Example 2: mage armour greatly benefits him while the armour-wearing melee classes do not get much out of it (apart from help vs incorporal attacks).Correct. Because they already HAVE +4 armor bonus to AC without it. Or better. Saying that monk is better because they get something others already have isn't much of an argument.


A two-level-dip is OK for many builds, but will cost you:
- unarmed damage progression (which gets better, the higher the level - non-core has some more ways apart from monk's belt to overcome this to a certain degree)If by "to a certain degree", you mean "completely", then you're correct.

- extra flurry attack and attack penalty reduction
- another (key) bonus feat (improved trip in core)
- and a bunch of quite a lot of different abilities (for instance, spell resistance).
Let's see. Would 1 extra attack, an attack penalty reduction, and SR that isn't hard to bypass at the levels you get it, be worth:

an entire class's class features? And by that, I mean a real class, not monk.

The answer, the vast majority of the time? Is yes.

One could make monk a 2 level class, and not severely disrupt the balance of anything.... Well, except for parties that are built and designed for the express purpose of everyone helping the monk so that he's on par.

So, levels 1-19 the monk makes better use of it (not counting a permanent enlarge which would still work when being cast before attaining level 20 I guess). I think that's enough to support my point: monks make better use of enlarge than fighters.Until the first time he's dispelled, at which point, he never has it again.

Could be. Depends. (for instance, a tumbling grappler would be a problem for a spiked chain wielder...etc.)
Show me one SRD-listed creature entry of a creature with tumble and great grapple skills.

For every one you can show me, I'll bet there's 30 that don't meet that requirement. Likely 50. Heck, maybe even an entire SRD's worth.

EDIT: That said, I like the idea of a psywar/monk class fusion.

[The Glyphstone]

No, because his damage does not stack as much with size gain as it does for the monk.

So, levels 1-19 the monk makes better use of it (not counting a permanent enlarge which would still work when being cast before attaining level 20 I guess). I think that's enough to support my point: monks make better use of enlarge than fighters.

- Giacomo

A fighter with a greatsword does 2d6+Str damage, increased to 3d6+Str when Enlarged. A monk does not get 2d6-damage fists until level 12, and gets 2d8 fists at level 16. So from levels 1-11, the fighter gets more damage from being Enlarged. From 12-15, they are equal, from 16-19 the Monk wins out, and at 20 the monk can't get Enlarged at all.

[RagnaroksChosen]

So i was thinking while working on a monk fix about how a monks unarmed attack counts as a natural weapon. I was thinking about this due to the argument made against monks not being proficient with there unarmed strikes. Aren't all characters always considered proficient with there natural weapons?

[PhoenixRivers]

A fighter with a greatsword does 2d6+Str damage, increased to 3d6+Str when Enlarged. A monk does not get 2d6-damage fists until level 12, and gets 2d8 fists at level 16. So from levels 1-11, the fighter gets more damage from being Enlarged. From 12-15, they are equal, from 16-19 the Monk wins out, and at 20 the monk can't get Enlarged at all.

Actually, the fighter gets 1.5 strength. So, if the average damage boost via die type from 16 to 19 is less than half the fighter's str modifier, he's still ahead (assuming equal strength).

And it goes without saying that the extra 50% strength puts the fighter boosted from 12-15.

[ScionoftheVoid]

No, because his damage does not stack as much with size gain as it does for the monk.



So, levels 1-19 the monk makes better use of it (not counting a permanent enlarge which would still work when being cast before attaining level 20 I guess). I think that's enough to support my point: monks make better use of enlarge than fighters.



Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Grapple, Expertise, Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes? 5 feats? All at level 1? I do not think this is possible for a fighter (barring flaws etc, highly campaign-specific).
But of course the fighter can take them in the first levels - but then suffers from MAD (while the monk can get those feats without prereqs).


A Fighter's damage output is affected just as much by Enlarge Person as a Monks.:smallconfused: Why would it be any better for a Monk? Fighters gain the same from damage die increases as Monks do and still benefit from improved reach and higher Strength, so I certainly have no idea why you think that a Monk gets more mileage. A Fighter has less reason for Wisdom so they can probably put more into Charisma or at least Intelligence (which will help with qualifying for Combat Expertise if needed in that build) to enhance UMD to get the effect.

How is a Monk getting all of those feats, anyway? Those five feats at level one are not available except through flaws, even with Monk, unless you'd like to enlighten me. I can get Human Monk 1 with Improved Unarmed Strike (Monk class), Improved Grapple (Monk bonus feat), Combat Expertise (normal feat, still needs prerequisites) and Improved Trip (human bonus feat, still needs to qualify). Combat Reflexes is at second level, by which time the Fighter can have all but one and Improved Unarmed Strike is safe to drop because it's a terrible match for the rest of the feats, though Improved Grapple is also fairly safe. Unless you're dumping Wisdom the Monk is so far just as MAD as the Fighter. Str, Dex, Con and Int (13+) are all needed for either, even if Combat Reflexes is qualification free it needs Dex to function, Str and Con are needed if you're in melee to use the actions granted by those feats and there is no way I am aware of, in Core, which allows the Monk to gain Combat Expertise without qualifying.

I'll come back to your calling me on the Cleric thing later (maybe even tommorow, I'm not going to post for around an hour at minimum), but it centres around the Cleric gaining the buffs you suggest for a Monk more easily than a Monk whilst having the same BAB, Hit Die and roughly the same ability focuses, speaking of which do you have a preference for the point-buy used?

[Beowulf DW]

So i was thinking while working on a monk fix about how a monks unarmed attack counts as a natural weapon. I was thinking about this due to the argument made against monks not being proficient with there unarmed strikes. Aren't all characters always considered proficient with there natural weapons?

I don't think that unarmed strikes are considered natural weapons according to the rules of D&D. Personally, I think that's rediculous, because in real life, even without training, a person instinctively knows where and how to hit effectively. People become much more effective with training, of course, but a lot of that is due to conditioning so that you don't hurt yourself.

[Quietus]

The bit you're referring to reads like this :


A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

Since it's only treated as a natural weapon for those specific situations, the Monk doesn't gain proficiency as a result of that.

[RagnaroksChosen]

I don't think that unarmed strikes are considered natural weapons according to the rules of D&D. Personally, I think that's rediculous, because in real life, even without training, a person instinctively knows where and how to hit effectively. People become much more effective with training, of course, but a lot of that is due to conditioning so that you don't hurt yourself.

I agree with the ridiculousness.. Though from what people say according to raw a monk doesn't have proficiency with there unarmed strikes.

Unarmed strikes are simple weapons which is not on the list of monk weapons there for the are un proficient By RAW.

Though a monk can use an amulet of natural attacks and some say can take improved natural weapon. So wouldn't it count as a natural attack and therefore a monk would be proficient?

[Tyndmyr]

There is more in D&D than is dreamt of in internet theorycrafting.

The fact is that not every D&D game is going to turn out the same - there are a lot of factors, mechanical and otherwise, and a wide diversity of many of those factors.

And if you'll note, I'm not telling him he should bother to be convincing - rather, I'm telling him he shouldn't bother.

The claims of power always end up unsupported or resulting from heavy homebrew. There's nothing wrong with heavy homebrew, but you can't get generalized conclusions about a class from such an example.

I was not at all surprised to learn that monks are weak. It matched up excellently with my experiences as a player. Oddly enough, I still meet people who believe monks(especially vop monks) are overpowered. I mostly smile and nod, as it's blatantly obvious that most of them have severe problems actually hitting people.

[Frosty]

Only creatures with RHD are automatically proficient with their natural weapons (if any) anyhow. Most PC races only gain HD through their classes.

[Petrocorus]

That and the player got a 3 LA and 1 RHD template for just 1 LA :smallannoyed:

What is the RHD template?

[RagnaroksChosen]

Only creatures with RHD are automatically proficient with their natural weapons (if any) anyhow. Most PC races only gain HD through their classes.

So a kobold with the webenhancement doesn't have prof.
Or what about a posion dusk lizard folk?
I think there are a few others that have nat attacks and no RHD.

[Tyndmyr]

An occasionally arising misperception. The opposite is true.
I did a whole UMD monk build proving that yes, of course a monk can have all the buffs and spells necessary that synergise greatly with his class abilities, independent from casters in the group.
Then, have a look at the build examples I provided above - none have any spells cast, only enlarge (quite a common buff for melees I daresay). And that is taken from the monk's own money.

If you're going to use UMD to fake being a gish, why not just make a gish? It'd be far cheaper, more effective, and cmon...the class abilities from many levels of monk are poor at best. Who cares about Slow Fall when you have Feather Fall?

[Mystic Muse]

What is the RHD template?

I Thought that half dragon was 3 la and 1 RHD. Just ignore that comment.

[Frosty]

Actually, I think I may be wrong with the information. Disregard what I said above.

However, the crux of the matter is that unarmed strike is clearly NOT a natural attack. You can make Iteratives with it.

[Darrin]

Aren't all characters always considered proficient with there natural weapons?

No. By RAW, creatures are given proficiency with natural weapons by their creature type. Thus, animals, magical beasts, etc. explicitly get proficiency with their natural weapons.

The humanoid type gets no such provision, they are "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class." A humanoid monk is proficient with the weapons listed in the monk's class description, which does not include unarmed strikes or natural weapons.

It all boils down to the rules for unarmed strikes and natural attacks being very vague and spread out in non-obvious ways throughout the core books. If the designers had bothered to specify that an unarmed strike is essentially a slam attack, or at least allowed it to be treated that way under certain conditions, and then been a bit clearer about how natural attacks interact with iterative/manufactured weapons, then these periodic arguments wouldn't be necessary. The whole "monks aren't proficient with unarmed strikes" thing is more of a sloppiness/oversight thing. I have never, ever heard of a DM that forced a monk to take a non-proficiency penalty on unarmed strikes.

[Tyndmyr]

I don't think that unarmed strikes are considered natural weapons according to the rules of D&D. Personally, I think that's rediculous, because in real life, even without training, a person instinctively knows where and how to hit effectively. People become much more effective with training, of course, but a lot of that is due to conditioning so that you don't hurt yourself.

No. Ever seen two kids fight? Hair pulling is as good a tactic as punching for them. Someone with basic unarmed combat training will almost certainly defeat someone without it. I would not agree that everyone is automatically proficient at punching people.

RAW, it's pretty clear that they aren't.

Technically, monks are not proficient with their fists, yes..but this is likely an oversight, and is best ignored anyhow. Monks are weak enough as is.

[Thorcrest]

I have played a monk and basically became the disarmer of the party. As well as a fine damage arm. This was likely due however to the fact that the DM allowed us to buy/find many items that increased the damage for unarmed attacks... although in his defense these were sometimes in published Adventures.

Ahhh the level 5 monk doing 8D6 damage per hit hitting at least once or twice. Or something like that It has been a while

[RagnaroksChosen]

No. By RAW, creatures are given proficiency with natural weapons by their creature type. Thus, animals, magical beasts, etc. explicitly get proficiency with their natural weapons.

The humanoid type gets no such provision, they are "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class." A humanoid monk is proficient with the weapons listed in the monk's class description, which does not include unarmed strikes or natural weapons.

It all boils down to the rules for unarmed strikes and natural attacks being very vague and spread out in non-obvious ways throughout the core books. If the designers had bothered to specify that an unarmed strike is essentially a slam attack, or at least allowed it to be treated that way under certain conditions, and then been a bit clearer about how natural attacks interact with iterative/manufactured weapons, then these periodic arguments wouldn't be necessary. The whole "monks aren't proficient with unarmed strikes" thing is more of a sloppiness/oversight thing. I have never, ever heard of a DM that forced a monk to take a non-proficiency penalty on unarmed strikes.

So then if a monk was a different racial type they would?
So half giants, dragonwrought kobolds, ogres and the like are considered proficent with there unarmed strikes/natural weapons?

[JaronK]

So then if a monk was a different racial type they would?
So half giants, dragonwrought kobolds, ogres and the like are considered proficent with there unarmed strikes/natural weapons?

Correct. Only Humanoid monks have problems in this regard (at least by RAW). I believe every other type gives proficiency at least with natural weapons.

JaronK

[RagnaroksChosen]

Correct. Only Humanoid monks have problems in this regard (at least by RAW). I believe every other type gives proficiency at least with natural weapons.

JaronK

That's pretty amusing.

[Sir Giacomo]

And yet, no solid answer was given for how a monk is supposed to keep WBL on par with the rest of his party, when 90% of it's spent on consumables.

1) a solid answer was given
2) highlighted also by your statement that wrongly assumes 90% of my joker monk build wbl was spent on consumables. It is easy enough for everyone to look that up.


I'd be willing to bet money that enlarge helps a reach weapon tripper more than it helps a monk. Much more.

You'd lose since
1) a monk can also use a reach weapon to trip once he has improved trip (since it is touch attack proficiency penalty hardly matters) and
2) a monk can get the special combat maneuvers without prereqs, being better able to focus on STR
3) has better movement to position himself in best tripping /battlefield control position.


Correct. Because they already HAVE +4 armor bonus to AC without it. Or better. Saying that monk is better because they get something others already have isn't much of an argument.

Why not? And who exactly gets a weightless +4 armour bonus without armour penalties or DEX caps that helps vs incorporal attacks as well without the mage armour buff?


If by "to a certain degree", you mean "completely", then you're correct.

Are you really sure that all non-core things to push up a monk's unarmed damage without actually taking monk levels stack? And what will you give up (in terms of item costs, inflexible builds, required feats etc) to do this?


Let's see. Would 1 extra attack, an attack penalty reduction, and SR that isn't hard to bypass at the levels you get it, be worth:
an entire class's class features?

It would not be - but luckily that is not exactly ALL that a monk gets from levels 3-20, is it?:smallwink:


And by that, I mean a real class, not monk.

:smallsigh:


The answer, the vast majority of the time? Is yes.

Nope.


One could make monk a 2 level class, and not severely disrupt the balance of anything.... Well, except for parties that are built and designed for the express purpose of everyone helping the monk so that he's on par.
Until the first time he's dispelled, at which point, he never has it again.

It is interesting that only a few posts I pointed out a misperception of what my monk is about and here again it is repeated.
Again: a monk using UMD to get his buffs is not "everyone helping the monk". It is the exact opposite.


Show me one SRD-listed creature entry of a creature with tumble and great grapple skills.
For every one you can show me, I'll bet there's 30 that don't meet that requirement. Likely 50. Heck, maybe even an entire SRD's worth.

Are opponents in a typical campaign only monsters and never npc fighters or monks? And that creatures with such tactics available exist (couatls and xills, for instance) in combination with npcs is, as I said, just one out of many situations where grappling tactics would be better to use than spiked chain tactics.


EDIT: That said, I like the idea of a psywar/monk class fusion.

So do I!


A fighter with a greatsword does 2d6+Str damage, increased to 3d6+Str when Enlarged. A monk does not get 2d6-damage fists until level 12, and gets 2d8 fists at level 16. So from levels 1-11, the fighter gets more damage from being Enlarged. From 12-15, they are equal, from 16-19 the Monk wins out, and at 20 the monk can't get Enlarged at all.

Do not omit (in core) the improved natural attack feat (outside core, there are way more possibilities). This means that by level 6, the monk is on par with size stacking for damage - and is way ahead with monk's belt by level 15 with 6d8 enlarged vs the fighter's 3d6.

- Giacomo

[Swok]

1) a monk can also use a reach weapon to trip once he has improved trip (since it is touch attack proficiency penalty hardly matters) and
2) a monk can get the special combat maneuvers without prereqs, being better able to focus on STR
3) has better movement to position himself in best tripping /battlefield control position.


Seriously? I'm really curious as to how a monk can focus on strength more than a fighter can. About the only point that's even valid is the third, since even if proficiency penalty "doesn't matter" you'll still be tripping more and more accurately without penalty and with higher BAB.

[sofawall]

Why not? And who exactly gets a weightless +4 armour bonus without armour penalties or DEX caps that helps vs incorporal attacks as well without the mage armour buff?

The thing is, anyone can get the buff. Monks do not benefit more from it, they benefit equally.

The difference is, the monk is more likely to need it. Fighters have the option to wear a chain shirt, or a breastplate, or full plate, or use Mage Armour!. Fighters can even use shields! Monks have the choice of Mage Armour.

[Frosty]

Correct. Only Humanoid monks have problems in this regard (at least by RAW). I believe every other type gives proficiency at least with natural weapons.

JaronK

And since most PCs are humanoids...is this enough to move Monks down a tier? :smallbiggrin:

[Kantolin]

Monks are fairly common in my group, but we're generally extremely unoptimized.

Monks are seen as pretty hard to kill but not tremendously hard hitting.

[Gnaeus]

Do not omit (in core) the improved natural attack feat (outside core, there are way more possibilities). This means that by level 6, the monk is on par with size stacking for damage - and is way ahead with monk's belt by level 15 with 6d8 enlarged vs the fighter's 3d6.

- Giacomo

Do not omit that the fighter or barbarian is dealing most of their damage through power attack x 2 (2 handed weapon) or more probably x 3-4 with other multipliers, which leaves the monk in the dust.

[Tyndmyr]

1) a solid answer was given
2) highlighted also by your statement that wrongly assumes 90% of my joker monk build wbl was spent on consumables. It is easy enough for everyone to look that up.

I have no idea where to look this up. The query "joker monk" returns this thread, followed by a number of threads in which you argued about the viability of monks. I see no list of build or consumables.


You'd lose since
1) a monk can also use a reach weapon to trip once he has improved trip (since it is touch attack proficiency penalty hardly matters) and

No proficiency and partial bab is pretty harsh. It's quite clear that a fighter, barbarian, or any proper tripping build is vastly better at this. Fighters also have more feats, so it's easier for them to pick up this trick, and still be competent in other things.

So, since they can actually hit, then yes, enlarge would help another reach weapon tripper more than a monk.


2) a monk can get the special combat maneuvers without prereqs, being better able to focus on STR

Monks are more mad than fighters, etc. Once the fighter or barb hits int 13, he's done. He can afford to have lower con due to higher hit die. The monk is less able to focus on strength.


3) has better movement to position himself in best tripping /battlefield control position.

Who cares? A gaming mat is only so big. Your fighter or barbarian has no difficulty getting in position unless he's small, or slowed, or other unusual conditions apply.


Why not? And who exactly gets a weightless +4 armour bonus without armour penalties or DEX caps that helps vs incorporal attacks as well without the mage armour buff?

Or shield, or greater mage armor, or whatever. Getting a +4 armor bonus is easy.

Hell, if you're comparing monks belt and a pile of wisdom on a monk....that works just as well for any other unarmored char.


Are you really sure that all non-core things to push up a monk's unarmed damage without actually taking monk levels stack? And what will you give up (in terms of item costs, inflexible builds, required feats etc) to do this?

Nobody cares if it's non-core. Fighters have more feats.

Yeah, it's probably a weak build, but that's because using weapons is superior. What's the point of making a fighter-monk when you can make a fighter that would one shot either a monk or a fake monk with one swing?


It would not be - but luckily that is not exactly ALL that a monk gets from levels 3-20, is it?:smallwink:

Yay for features like being an outsider, or getting a 1/week death attack. With an easy save. And requiring a hit. On a class with partial BaB and that happens to be MAD.

They get stuff...it's just really bad stuff.


It is interesting that only a few posts I pointed out a misperception of what my monk is about and here again it is repeated.
Again: a monk using UMD to get his buffs is not "everyone helping the monk". It is the exact opposite.

It's "the monk is ok when he has caster support". It isn't pointing out the strengths of monk, it's pointing out the strengths of UMD.


Are opponents in a typical campaign only monsters and never npc fighters or monks? And that creatures with such tactics available exist (couatls and xills, for instance) in combination with npcs is, as I said, just one out of many situations where grappling tactics would be better to use than spiked chain tactics.

Spiked chains tactics beat grappling tactics, because you take an AoO on the way in. Stand Still, for example, will ensure that you never have an opportunity to actually grapple.

Also, grapplers are horrible unless on a team with an action economy advantage.


Do not omit (in core) the improved natural attack feat (outside core, there are way more possibilities). This means that by level 6, the monk is on par with size stacking for damage - and is way ahead with monk's belt by level 15 with 6d8 enlarged vs the fighter's 3d6.

So, you're comparing the monk with his feats vs the fighter without his. Good job.

PS: Monk unarmed progression stops at 20. Thanks to your level 15 comparison, and +5 from the belt, you're comparing at the highest level of damage your monk will get. Ever.

[Gan The Grey]

I would like to know where it says that someone is not proficient with their natural weapons or unarmed strikes, or that there is actually a weapon proficiency for it. As far as I can tell, improved unarmed strike grants proficiency with unarmed strikes, even if it doesn't specifically use those words.

Edit: I see it listed under simple weapons in the equipment section. Wow.

[Tyndmyr]

The above post makes sense.

In very low optimization environments, I could see this being the case. Things like poison immunity and a faster movement speed are relatively more important, since other things are relatively less used.

[sofawall]

I would like to know where it says that someone is not proficient with their natural weapons or unarmed strikes, or that there is actually a weapon proficiency for it. As far as I can tell, improved unarmed strike grants proficiency with unarmed strikes, even if it doesn't specifically use those words.

Unarmed strike is listed under simple weapons. Monks are not proficient with all simple weapons.

[AtwasAwamps]

(probably super ninja'd)

Normally, I don’t get embroiled in this sort of thing, but Giacomo has made a few points that…bother me.

Regarding using a monk as a tripper: Giacomo, you mention that you believe that a monk with improved trip can fulfill the tripper role just as well as a fighter designed to do so while wielding a reach trip weapon. However, this doesn’t mesh particularly well with the rest of your arguments for a number of reasons.

A – Your hypothetical monk lacks proficiency in any reach trip weapons. As a result, you receive a -4 to your attack. This is stacked on TOP of your comparatively lower BAB, meaning you suffer significantly more than a fighter for wielding a weapon like this…and a fighter naturally has the proficiency for this weapon anyways. Hence, your monk DOES have a significantly lower chance to hit than an average fighter with a trip attack. Now, granted, as you say, this is touch AC, so you’ll probably hit. Nonetheless, this does not remove the fact that the fighter is SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to hit than the monk, period.

B – You have been touting a monks unarmed damage. When wielding a reach weapon as in the above situation, you lose that significant damage and thus your monk loses yet another of his advantages vs. a warrior once he attempts to take up this strategy. In fact, your damage is significantly reduced, because a fighter can utilize his extra BAB and extra feats to obtain power attack, which will keep his damage nice and strong in comparison to your monk.

C – While a monk can get special combat maneuver related feats without the necessary stat pre-reqs, unfortunately he will remain MAD. If a monk chooses NOT to have a decent amount of Dex and Wis, he will forever have a significant lack of AC vs. a fighter, whose armor proficiency dominates the board if we’re talking about AC in this situation when vs. a low statted monk. If you state that the monk obviously would have at least a slight bonus in one or both of these stats, well, that’s all the fighter needs to be able to utilize the combat maneuver feats ANYWAYS, thus once again, negating your argument for a monks superiority in that matter.

D – Better movement. Okay, hey, you win here. Though I’ve rarely seen a tripper who can’t get himself where he needs to be and there are many ways to get yourself a faster movement speed.

[AmberVael]

Do not omit (in core) the improved natural attack feat (outside core, there are way more possibilities). This means that by level 6, the monk is on par with size stacking for damage - and is way ahead with monk's belt by level 15 with 6d8 enlarged vs the fighter's 3d6.

- Giacomo

You just spent a feat, ignored strength bonuses, and spent 13,000 gold, while the fighter is just waving around a plain old greatsword. Does this strike you as a particularly fair comparison?

More fair would be to say that the Monk with Natural Attack and Monk's belt and say... 16 Strength, would be up against a fighter with Power Attack, +2 greatsword, and an item of +2 strength, with base 16 Strength (18 with the item).

The monk would be dealing 6d8+4. Average? 31 damage.

The fighter could power attack (for -6, putting him on par in terms of attack bonus with the monk), giving him... 3d6+21. 31.5 damage.

And I just gave this fighter a random couple of items that might possibly be reasonable, along with a feat that any fighter would have. He's also still got 1000 gold spent less than the monk. Furthermore, the monk has unarmed damage as part of his class features, while I haven't even calculated in any extra features that the fighter might be using which might tip the balance even further in his favor- even just dropping in weapon focus would give him another 2 damage since he could drop his attack bonus lower for power attack.

I think you get the idea.

[Yukitsu]

I keep hearing this "Monks can do more damage with buffs" but every time I do the numbers with the same buffs on a fighter, the fighter will win by about 20 points, even after the whole thing is escalated to an absurd degree. Anyone have an actual monk build for me to work with? I'd do a barb or fighter, same PB and same buffs and I can guarantee that I can get more out of it.

[TheCountAlucard]

That is your view. You can easily make a very combat-oriented rogue, though.You can also make a combat-oriented Commoner; that doesn't make it a melee class.

...

...though now I kinda want to give it a try. "Bubs, peasant, farmer, Tarrasque slayer?!?"

[Kobold-Bard]

The above post makes sense.

In very low optimization environments, I could see this being the case. Things like poison immunity and a faster movement speed are relatively more important, since other things are relatively less used.

Plus three good Saves and Evasion are a big deal for low level survivability.

[ScionoftheVoid]

Okay, my Cleric-Monk basics. This Cleric is going to be built in Core, plus whatever Giacomo allows me, noting that I probably won't be able to use much beyond what's in the SRD (though I don't have anything in particular in mind, allowing the terrain variant races might be nice, for example). For these purposes Core is the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual of Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 edition. Collaboration is only allowed if Giacomo wishes to accept help with his basic Monk which will be trying to outdo this Cleric at Monk-ish-ness and will be at least layed out in feats, ability scores, race and notable skill allocation to ensure no Shroedinger's Monk arises.

Build plan:

Human Cleric of an ideal, though a diety may be chosen if appropriate. Alignment Lawful Neutral. Domains will probably be Strength and Destruction. Point-buy has yet to be confirmed so ability scores are not yet available. Skills of note include Hide, Concentration and if possible Move Silently. Feats include Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple at level one, Improved Natural Attack, Stunning Fist and other appropriate feats being gained later. Being Neutral without a deity this Cleric will choose to Rebuke Undead and spontaneously cast Cure spells (unless these are mutually exclusive, in which case they will Turn Undead instead).

Sound good so far?

[AtwasAwamps]

You can also make a combat-oriented Commoner; that doesn't make it a melee class.

...

...though now I kinda want to give it a try. "Bubs, peasant, farmer, Tarrasque slayer?!?"

...Tarrasque Rider.

[Tyndmyr]

I keep hearing this "Monks can do more damage with buffs" but every time I do the numbers with the same buffs on a fighter, the fighter will win by about 20 points, even after the whole thing is escalated to an absurd degree. Anyone have an actual monk build for me to work with? I'd do a barb or fighter, same PB and same buffs and I can guarantee that I can get more out of it.

The theory focuses on "more attacks", but that doesn't pan out unless facing an opponent with sufficiently low AC that the monk's lower BaB doesn't penalize him heavily.

Also, the strength modifier for 2h weapons is a significant factor as well. You can scale to pretty much any absurd number you want, but so long as you're facing opponents of roughly equal power level, the fighter or barbarian wins.

The lack of epic unarmed damage scaling is also a problem, if you scale up far enough(ie, level 16+)

And frankly, the ability to face opponents significantly below your power level is a poor way to judge a class. The ability to kill things at or above it are more indicative of power.

[Sir Giacomo]

If you're going to use UMD to fake being a gish, why not just make a gish? It'd be far cheaper, more effective, and cmon...the class abilities from many levels of monk are poor at best. Who cares about Slow Fall when you have Feather Fall?

That really depends. UMD provides access to ALL level 1-4 spells that are used occassionally 10x day and then maybe not at all for 5 encounters in a row.
What will adding 1-x levels of a spellcasting class give?
It CAN be a good decision to do that to get more spells/day that synergise with the remaining monk abilities and also enter prestige classes that advance in part both monk and spellcasting class (e.g. the enlightened fist or sacred fist prcs).
But it is not a good idea in all instances.
It also depends on what rules you have availble to do your build.
Also, it can be a good idea to not use UMD at all (as my example builds illustrate that are able to take on CR 5 and CR 10 well enough at levels 5 and 10 respectively in core rules environments).


A Fighter's damage output is affected just as much by Enlarge Person as a Monks.:smallconfused: Why would it be any better for a Monk? Fighters gain the same from damage die increases as Monks do and still benefit from improved reach and higher Strength, so I certainly have no idea why you think that a Monk gets more mileage.

See my last reply in the previous post above.


A Fighter has less reason for Wisdom so they can probably put more into Charisma or at least Intelligence (which will help with qualifying for Combat Expertise if needed in that build) to enhance UMD to get the effect.

But then a fighter would suffer from the disadvantages of having a low WIS sore (will save, for instance). But true, he may opt to focus on CHR and be better at UMD than a monk that does not focus on CHR.


How is a Monk getting all of those feats, anyway? Those five feats at level one are not available except through flaws, even with Monk, unless you'd like to enlighten me. I can get Human Monk 1 with Improved Unarmed Strike (Monk class), Improved Grapple (Monk bonus feat), Combat Expertise (normal feat, still needs prerequisites) and Improved Trip (human bonus feat, still needs to qualify). Combat Reflexes is at second level, by which time the Fighter can have all but one and Improved Unarmed Strike is safe to drop because it's a terrible match for the rest of the feats, though Improved Grapple is also fairly safe.

A misunderstanding. I never said that a monk can get all those 5 feats at level 1. Sinfire Titan, though, maintained that a fighter can do it which I showed is not possible.
A monk can get improved grapple, combat expertise and improved trip without prereqs, though. This includes having to take combat expertise for qualifying for improved trip.


Unless you're dumping Wisdom the Monk is so far just as MAD as the Fighter. Str, Dex, Con and Int (13+) are all needed for either, even if Combat Reflexes is qualification free it needs Dex to function, Str and Con are needed if you're in melee to use the actions granted by those feats and there is no way I am aware of, in Core, which allows the Monk to gain Combat Expertise without qualifying.

That would be true in case a monk tried to take his bonus feats at level 1 already - but he does not need to do that and thus is less MAD than the fighter when taking those feats.


I'll come back to your calling me on the Cleric thing later (maybe even tommorow, I'm not going to post for around an hour at minimum), but it centres around the Cleric gaining the buffs you suggest for a Monk more easily than a Monk whilst having the same BAB, Hit Die and roughly the same ability focuses, speaking of which do you have a preference for the point-buy used?

28-pt buy I guess. Looking forward to that cleric build.


Seriously? I'm really curious as to how a monk can focus on strength more than a fighter can. About the only point that's even valid is the third, since even if proficiency penalty "doesn't matter" you'll still be tripping more and more accurately without penalty and with higher BAB.

OK, maybe another example.
Half-Orc Fighter level 6, grapple/tripping build (half-orc to get +2 STR), 28 pt buy.
Needs INT 15 (improved trip needs INT 13, half-orc gets -2 to INT), DEX 15 (improved grapple needs DEX 13, but the key enlarge buff means a -2 to DEX).
INT 15 and DEX 15 means you spend 16 out of your 28 point buy. That leaves 12 points for your STR to spend - a STR of 16 at most for a total of 20 (with +2 racial adj. and +2 enlarge)

Meanwhile, the monk does not need any stat prereqs for improved grapple and improved trip.
Thus, 16 pts of his 28 pt buy go to STR 18 for a total of 22 (+2 racial/+2 size). The remaining 12 pts can go to boost CON and DEX to 14 each.


The thing is, anyone can get the buff. Monks do not benefit more from it, they benefit equally.

The difference is, the monk is more likely to need it. Fighters have the option to wear a chain shirt, or a breastplate, or full plate, or use Mage Armour!. Fighters can even use shields! Monks have the choice of Mage Armour.

The original subject of discussion was whether some classes get more mileage out of some buffs than others. And this is apparently the case for mage armour (or divine power, for instance).
As a contrast, spells that the monk makes absolutely (and not just relatively) best use of compared to other melee classes in core are, for instance:
- enlarge (see above)
- silence, AMF (high movement and tumble to get close to caster)
- obscuring mist (high movement, stealth skills while not being dependent on sneak damage, high number of attacks)
- owl's wisdom (quite obvious, I think)


- Giacomo

[Mushroom Ninja]

...though now I kinda want to give it a try. "Bubs, peasant, farmer, Tarrasque slayer?!?"

Sadly, with UMD and enough WBL, it's quite doable.

[krossbow]

I've played unmodified monks. In fact, I've never played in a campaign that houseruled them, though I have played in campaigns where they weren't allowed for flavor reasons.

I've never been in a group that plays 3.x D&D remotely like you'd think it's played based on a D&D forum on the internet - though I was going to DM such a group once, I never got much player interest.



'cause if you don't deal enough DPS, the group will totally kick you.




When your essentially dead weight, and the party is almost getting itself killed or going bankrupt from saving your butt or rezzing it, yeah, in character your party members might say "I'm sorry, but you will just slow us down in this battle. Please stay at home and do XXXX for us", or, for less morally upstanding characters (chaotic neutral, evil parties) *%^&^ you, leave him.

I've seen parties abandon people in prisons or other situations if the PC is viewed as a liability.




Monk's are GREAT for dipping, but without that, they suck

[Sinfire Titan]

...though now I kinda want to give it a try. "Bubs, peasant, farmer, Tarrasque slayer?!?"

Been done. JaronK built a Charger Commoner that can OHKO Big T a while back (pre-Gleemax overhaul).



D – Better movement. Okay, hey, you win here. Though I’ve rarely seen a tripper who can’t get himself where he needs to be and there are many ways to get yourself a faster movement speed.

Point of Order: Dusklings can get a faster move speed than a Monk. At most, it takes a 3 level dip into Incarnate. At least, a magic Helm from the MiC.

Hell, Totemist 20 gets the fastest speed this side of a spellcaster or dragon (160ft fly speed for 7 minutes/day, or 80ft at will).

[Starbuck_II]

I would like to know where it says that someone is not proficient with their natural weapons or unarmed strikes, or that there is actually a weapon proficiency for it.

Druids gain proficiency with natural weapons so you do need proficiency.

[sofawall]

- owl's wisdom (quite obvious, I think)

Druid/Cleric. They are both classes that are meant to be in melee at least as much as the monk (Armour, 3/4 BAB, Proficiencies, Wildshape for Druid).

[sofawall]

Sadly, with UMD and enough WBL, it's quite doable.

Hell, it's downright easy to do at level 13 and barely evennot touch WBL. You don't even need to use UMD!

EDIT: And can be done much sooner. Give me a minute...

[Yuki Akuma]

Druids gain proficiency with natural weapons so you do need proficiency.

That's a specific effect of wildshape, not a general rule.

Of course, it can be inferred that the designers intended everyone to be proficient with unarmed strikes. They probably didn't even think about it when they listed unarmed strikes under simple weapons, yet didn't mention them in the monk's class description.

[Darrin]

And since most PCs are humanoids...is this enough to move Monks down a tier? :smallbiggrin:

Sadly, no. As I said, I've never heard of anyone actually trying to enforce this rule, so as far as I know, 100% of all monks are played as proficient with their unarmed strikes.

The reason monks are found on the lower tiers is a much more complicated issue. I'd consider going into more depth here, except we get a "What's Wrong With the Monk?/The Best Monk Fix EVER!" thread about once or twice a week on these forums. I think there are two or three active threads out there already.

[PhoenixRivers]

1) a solid answer was given
2) highlighted also by your statement that wrongly assumes 90% of my joker monk build wbl was spent on consumables. It is easy enough for everyone to look that up.Exaggeration. However, it WAS shown that the Joker monk uses consumable WBL faster than the typical game gives it to him. No solid rebuttal was given to that, unless you count "a solid answer was given" as a solid answer.

Which I don't.


1) a monk can also use a reach weapon to trip once he has improved trip (since it is touch attack proficiency penalty hardly matters) and
Ah yes, I forgot, touting the monk's nonproficiencies and cross class skills as class features. Standard Giacomo "logic".

2) a monk can get the special combat maneuvers without prereqs, being better able to focus on STRAh yes, because Dex 13 and Int 13 are FAR more troublesome to acquire than a monk's wisdom. What was I thinking?

So no. Just no. I can't count how many ways you are wrong above.


3) has better movement to position himself in best tripping /battlefield control position.When a fighter can easily and reasonably (in core) reach a 20-30 feet reach, and out of core 70+ feet of reach is attainable? Movement is less an issue than you'd think.

The majority of battlefields take place in an area less than 100 feet x 100 feet. A fighter in a chain shirt (or later, Mithril Breastplate) can cover 2/3 of that distance in a double move, with a 20 foot reach covering 80% of it. That seems reasonable.


Why not? And who exactly gets a weightless +4 armour bonus without armour penalties or DEX caps that helps vs incorporal attacks as well without the mage armour buff?A nonmagical chain shirt on a character with no more than an 18 dex, for whom the weight won't bring them to a light load (such as a fighter) covers about 95% of that, at level 1. "Weight penalties" and "Armor check penalties" are less trouble than you'd think. But if it's that big an issue, a mithril Chain Shirt supports up to a 22 dex, with no ACP.

To be honest, if you assume the Chain Shirt's Max dex to be a factor, you assume a Dex of 20+. That kinda takes away from the "monk's superior ability to focus on strength" that you mentioned earlier, mmm?


Are you really sure that all non-core things to push up a monk's unarmed damage without actually taking monk levels stack? And what will you give up (in terms of item costs, inflexible builds, required feats etc) to do this?2 feats and any of about 5-6 classes. Tashalatora. Works great since we were talking about a 2 level monk dip anyway. Two of the classes are below:

Monk 2/Psywar 18
Monk 2/Ardent 18

Both of the above are rewarded for a Wisdom focus, and receive flurry, unarmed strike damage, and AC bonuses on par with a pure monk. Both trade the monk 3-20 features for a manifesting class, and receive manifesting at the highest level of power for that class.


It would not be - but luckily that is not exactly ALL that a monk gets from levels 3-20, is it?:smallwink:I'd say that's all that a monk gets that's worthwhile, but not everything that was originally listed was worthwhile.

It is interesting that only a few posts I pointed out a misperception of what my monk is about and here again it is repeated.
Again: a monk using UMD to get his buffs is not "everyone helping the monk". It is the exact opposite.Yes, THAT build is "falling behind WBL to pretend to have class features it does not". Most other monk builds ARE, however, needing such help.


Are opponents in a typical campaign only monsters and never npc fighters or monks? And that creatures with such tactics available exist (couatls and xills, for instance) in combination with npcs is, as I said, just one out of many situations where grappling tactics would be better to use than spiked chain tactics. I like how you point out EVERY SRD entry with tumble as a "for instance". That's like me including every noble gas as a "sample" of noble gases. It's misleading. The fact remains that Tumble is an uncommon skill, both in the SRD, and on class lists. It has 1 useful function. Avoid AoO's. As such, it's not taken by most NPC fighters. As for NPC monks? If the class is too bad for PC's to take, it's too bad for NPC's to take. Take that argument elsewhere. That limits it to, NPC rogues. I think that 2 SRD entries and a single viable class does not a strong argument make. That's like saying that spears are better than rifles in nebraska, because the threat of underwater combat is ever looming.


Do not omit (in core) the improved natural attack feat (outside core, there are way more possibilities). This means that by level 6, the monk is on par with size stacking for damage - and is way ahead with monk's belt by level 15 with 6d8 enlarged vs the fighter's 3d6.
What were you saying about restrictive builds and required feats, again?

[TheCountAlucard]

Sinfire Titan, though, maintained that a fighter can do it which I showed is not possible.Except that you then admitted that it was possible.

[AtwasAwamps]

Point of Order: Dusklings can get a faster move speed than a Monk. At most, it takes a 3 level dip into Incarnate. At least, a magic Helm from the MiC.

Hell, Totemist 20 gets the fastest speed this side of a spellcaster or dragon (160ft fly speed for 7 minutes/day, or 80ft at will).

Well, I was going to throw him a bone...

Though to be fair, we probably shouldn't bring dipping into it. A fighter with certain totemic barbarian dips will just make things silly.

[PhoenixRivers]

That really depends. UMD provides access to ALL level 1-4 spells that are used occassionally 10x day and then maybe not at all for 5 encounters in a row.
What will adding 1-x levels of a spellcasting class give?WBL that is on par with other PC's?

[Volkov]

A level 30 fighter and his level 28 fighter chort has some (as in a very small chance that should only ever happen due to dumb luck or munchkining on their part and/or a lack of optimization on the druid's) chance against a level 30 druid in battletitan form and her tyrannosaurus rex pet. A monk of the same level and his monk cohort have no shot, ever...period.

[Tyndmyr]

That really depends. UMD provides access to ALL level 1-4 spells that are used occassionally 10x day and then maybe not at all for 5 encounters in a row.
What will adding 1-x levels of a spellcasting class give?
It CAN be a good decision to do that to get more spells/day that synergise with the remaining monk abilities and also enter prestige classes that advance in part both monk and spellcasting class (e.g. the enlightened fist or sacred fist prcs).
But it is not a good idea in all instances.
It also depends on what rules you have availble to do your build.
Also, it can be a good idea to not use UMD at all (as my example builds illustrate that are able to take on CR 5 and CR 10 well enough at levels 5 and 10 respectively in core rules environments).

If you're using any item 10 times in a day, the cost will be significant. Also, minimum caster level leaves you highly vulnerable to dispell, and with short buff durations.

So, casting is quite clearly superior to UMD if you intend to use it significantly. And hey, you could always use both if pulling from many odd sources is important to you.


But then a fighter would suffer from the disadvantages of having a low WIS sore (will save, for instance). But true, he may opt to focus on CHR and be better at UMD than a monk that does not focus on CHR.

A fighter will have a low WIS score. If he wishes to fix it, the player visits the X to Y thread, and grabs a feat that solves the issue much more efficiently than throwing precious stats at it.


28-pt buy I guess. Looking forward to that cleric build.

I'll build a non-monk melee char(probably fighter/barb) with the same point buy then. Nothing crazy, just a fighter that is demonstratably superior to a 28pt buy monk. Any source restrictions?


The original subject of discussion was whether some classes get more mileage out of some buffs than others. And this is apparently the case for mage armour (or divine power, for instance).

An unarmored monk and an unarmored fighter get exactly the same thing out of mage armor.

A fighter merely also has the ability to wear armor without losing his class features.


As a contrast, spells that the monk makes absolutely (and not just relatively) best use of compared to other melee classes in core are, for instance:
- enlarge (see above)

Size is size. It helps everyone. Reach matters more for builds that exploit it, AoOs, and other related feats. Monks do this poorly. Monks do get better unarmed die, though. I consider this a draw.


- silence, AMF (high movement and tumble to get close to caster)

You're casting level 6 spells off scrolls now? With cross class UMD? After all, AMF is a self-only spell.

What other melee classes DONT use tumble?

We've already pointed out that movement doesn't really matter much. Any level at which you have access to these, a caster will not be merely standing on the ground, casually looking the other way while you run at him.


- obscuring mist (high movement, stealth skills while not being dependent on sneak damage, high number of attacks)

It is stationary once created.

So...you can sneak around it in quickly? What? You can create it and run out of it faster?


- owl's wisdom (quite obvious, I think)

True. However, they wouldn't bother casting it. They'd use Bear's Strength instead, which is an equivalent, and end up still more powerful than you.

[Indon]

If you're going to use UMD to fake being a gish, why not just make a gish? It'd be far cheaper, more effective, and cmon...the class abilities from many levels of monk are poor at best. Who cares about Slow Fall when you have Feather Fall?

If you're going to have spellcasting and melee, why not just make a full spellcaster? It'd be far cheaper (as you could craft whatever you need), more effective ('cause you're a full spellcaster), and honestly, what can any Gish build offer that a caster can't do?

[Sinfire Titan]

I've seen parties abandon people in prisons or other situations if the PC is viewed as a liability.

Monk's are GREAT for dipping, but without that, they suck

Right. Hell, even when you're playing a good class it's possible for everyone else to just want to leave you in a ditch somewhere. My little brother is playing a Totemist, and the rest of the party wants to desperately get rid of him (shows that player competence is taken into account for everything).

[Volkov]

If you're going to have spellcasting and melee, why not just make a full spellcaster? It'd be far cheaper (as you could craft whatever you need), more effective ('cause you're a full spellcaster), and honestly, what can any Gish build offer that a caster can't do?

Or just be a druid or cleric who don't need items to be scary in melee.

[Indon]

Or just be a druid or cleric who don't need items to be scary in melee.

Indeed.

Between Wizard, Druid, Cleric, and their variants (like Cloistered Cleric), you basically obsolete every class under Tier 3, and most classes in Tier 3, just with some reflavoring.

[Tyndmyr]

If you're going to have spellcasting and melee, why not just make a full spellcaster? It'd be far cheaper (as you could craft whatever you need), more effective ('cause you're a full spellcaster), and honestly, what can any Gish build offer that a caster can't do?

Different goal.

Using UMD to get lots of buffs is an inefficient means to that goal. A well built gish can still be a fullcaster. One level of what, Dragon Disciple, then dive into Eldritch Knight? Only one caster level behind a straight spellcaster, and you've got some chops in melee. Reasonable trade.

[Volkov]

Indeed.

Between Wizard, Druid, Cleric, and their variants (like Cloistered Cleric), you basically obsolete every class under Tier 3, and most classes in Tier 3, just with some reflavoring.

A druid in battletitan form with a t-rex for a pet is something that makes every non-tier one class a waste of time.

[AtwasAwamps]

A druid in battletitan form with a t-rex for a pet is something that makes every non-tier one class a waste of time.

Could a battletitan ride a t-rex?

[Tyndmyr]

A druid in battletitan form with a t-rex for a pet is something that makes every non-tier one class a waste of time.

Pah. Pun pun says pally wins.

The point is that optimization happens toward a goal. More than a dip of monk is generally an extremely poor way of acheiving any particular character effectiveness.

[Tyndmyr]

Plus three good Saves and Evasion are a big deal for low level survivability.

This is true. In low optimization games, it's not uncommon to see dips for evasion. It's a great skill in a world in which most traps and spells involve reflex saves.

[Volkov]

Could a battletitan ride a t-rex?

Sadly a battletitan is a huge dinosaur, it's too big for rexy, but with some magic we could fix that.

[Gametime]

That's like saying that spears are better than rifles in nebraska, because the threat of underwater combat is ever looming.


Sharks in Nebraska have been documented giving birth to the Shark Messiah (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275035,00.html). Don't be so glib about the importance of carrying spears - you never know when Jawsus will begin to crave human flesh.

[Tyndmyr]

When your essentially dead weight, and the party is almost getting itself killed or going bankrupt from saving your butt or rezzing it, yeah, in character your party members might say "I'm sorry, but you will just slow us down in this battle. Please stay at home and do XXXX for us", or, for less morally upstanding characters (chaotic neutral, evil parties) *%^&^ you, leave him.

I've seen parties abandon people in prisons or other situations if the PC is viewed as a liability.

True. The Elan character, in party, tends to meet with more than "aw, you're annoying but lovable". My last such character was sold into slavery by his party.

A more upstanding party might feel guilt over ordering an incompetent into battle, and try to find a safer place for him.

Sure, there's a very wide range of competence that most parties will accept, but you need to have some.

[sofawall]

I'd be willing to take on any level of non-epic monk with my level 10 commoner, assuming two things: Books are not restricted (Eberron/FR/Dragonlance books can be banned, if you want) and infinite loops are not allowed.

[AtwasAwamps]

Sadly a battletitan is a huge dinosaur, it's too big for rexy, but with some magic we could fix that.

Let's do it. Strap a lance to the battle-titan and we have the best thing ever.

Wait. Wait.

Can we have a halfling riding the battletitan which is riding the T-rex BUT REALLY is riding the T-rex's giant F-14 fighter?

Hell, the halfling can be monk 20 with all his stats in int, this build is still the best ever.

[Volkov]

Sharks in Nebraska have been documented giving birth to the Shark Messiah (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275035,00.html). Don't be so glib about the importance of carrying spears - you never know when Jawsus will begin to crave human flesh.

The Canadian Lazar Bears and super-monkeys will save us, aided by an army of purple flying hippoes and twenty foot tall toddlers in overalls with pitchforks.

[Tyndmyr]

I'd be willing to take on any level of non-epic monk with my level 9 commoner, assuming two things: Books are not restricted (Eberron/FR/Dragonlance books can be banned, if you want) and infinite loops are not allowed.

At first I thought you were just being silly, given that commoners have nothing monks dont.

Then I realized commoners have Handle Animal and monks do not.

[Volkov]

Let's do it. Strap a lance to the battle-titan and we have the best thing ever.

Wait. Wait.

Can we have a halfling riding the battletitan which is riding the T-rex BUT REALLY is riding the T-rex's giant F-14 fighter?

Hell, the halfling can be monk 20 with all his stats in int, this build is still the best ever.

Yes, yes we can. The wizards will see who's laughing now with this build.

[Tyndmyr]

Yes, yes we can. The wizards will see who's laughing now with this build.

Oh please, you think a mere F-14 can withstand the wrath of this fully armed and operational wizard?

[Volkov]

At first I thought you were just being silly, given that commoners have nothing monks dont.

Then I realized commoners have Handle Animal and monks do not.

Commoner John smith with max hit dice tyrannosaurus as a pet. Can I get a hell yes?

[Sir Giacomo]

So...many...posts...overload...to....answer...them ...all...
:smallwink:
Seriously, I'll try to provide answers, but that may take time...and I'll need to sleep soon.

Quite frankly, I am surprised that so many still cling to the notion that monks are a subpar class after so many evidence, arguments and examples have already been given.

- Giacomo

[Volkov]

Oh please, you think a mere F-14 can withstand the wrath of this fully armed and operational wizard?

We'll defeat your shields with Lazar bears then fly down to your core and missile it, while backed by an army of purple flying hippoes.

[Tyndmyr]

Quite frankly, I am surprised that so many still cling to the notion that monks are a subpar class after so many evidence, arguments and examples have already been given.

- Giacomo

Probably due to all the debunking in those many responses.

[BRC]

The Canadian Lazar Bears and super-monkeys will save us, aided by an army of purple flying hippoes and twenty foot tall toddlers in overalls with pitchforks.
Don't be silly.

Canadians have War Moose, everybody knows that.

Also: No wizard could beat the Will Save to avoid running in terror when faced with the Tyranossaur in an F-14. And even if they could, they would still lose.

[sofawall]

At first I thought you were just being silly, given that commoners have nothing monks dont.

Then I realized commoners have Handle Animal and monks do not.

I am not being silly, and I will not be using Bubs, or anything similar. It will be a commoner and his feats/gear/skills/whatever, against the monk with same. The Monk could even take Leadership, I couldn't care less. The Commoner will stand alone.


And I bet Commoner would probably win.

[Swok]

So...many...posts...overload...to....answer...them ...all...
:smallwink:
Seriously, I'll try to provide answers, but that may take time...and I'll need to sleep soon.

Quite frankly, I am surprised that so many still cling to the notion that monks are a subpar class after so many evidence, arguments and examples have already been given.

- Giacomo

It's crazy how people will tend to not believe something that is untrue.

[AtwasAwamps]

Quite frankly, I am surprised that so many still cling to the notion that monks are a subpar class after so many evidence, arguments and examples have already been given.

- Giacomo


My head just exploded. Do you know how hard it is to type with an exploded head?

It's alright, I replaced it with a T-rex.

[Volkov]

Don't be silly.

Canadians have War Moose, everybody knows that.

Also: No wizard could beat the Will Save to avoid running in terror when faced with the Tyranossaur in an F-14. And even if they could, they would still lose.

And said tyrannosaurus rex iiis the animal companion of a level thirty druid in battletitan mode, who is in the copilot seat and has a level 28 halfling druid cohort and his deinonychus animal companion riding on the T.rex

[Sir Giacomo]

You just spent a feat, ignored strength bonuses, and spent 13,000 gold, while the fighter is just waving around a plain old greatsword. Does this strike you as a particularly fair comparison?

More fair would be to say that the Monk with Natural Attack and Monk's belt and say... 16 Strength, would be up against a fighter with Power Attack, +2 greatsword, and an item of +2 strength, with base 16 Strength (18 with the item).

The monk would be dealing 6d8+4. Average? 31 damage.

The fighter could power attack (for -6, putting him on par in terms of attack bonus with the monk), giving him... 3d6+21. 31.5 damage.

And I just gave this fighter a random couple of items that might possibly be reasonable, along with a feat that any fighter would have. He's also still got 1000 gold spent less than the monk. Furthermore, the monk has unarmed damage as part of his class features, while I haven't even calculated in any extra features that the fighter might be using which might tip the balance even further in his favor- even just dropping in weapon focus would give him another 2 damage since he could drop his attack bonus lower for power attack.

I think you get the idea.

What exactly does this have to do with whether a monk or a fighter benefit more from size stacking provided by enlarge?
The question was not whether a monk can do the same damage output as a fighter at level x, but whether he benefits more from the size stacking effect of enlarge to damage dice.

- Giacomo

[Eorran]

Also: No wizard could beat the Will Save to avoid running in terror when faced with the Tyranossaur in an F-14. And even if they could, they would still lose.

That's not a Save vs. Fear, that's a Save vs. Awesome. DC: You lose, because it's still Awesome.

[Tyndmyr]

Don't be silly.

Canadians have War Moose, everybody knows that.

Also: No wizard could beat the Will Save to avoid running in terror when faced with the Tyranossaur in an F-14. And even if they could, they would still lose.

Fine....fine....the wizard will take leadership, and have this druid as his cohort.

[PhoenixRivers]

WBL assessment:

A certain amount of treasure is incorporated into the treasure tables to account for sale of unused gear, and purchase of new gear, as well as consumables. This is able to be calculated, thusly.

Take the Average treasure per encounter table in the DMG (table 3-1), and divide each result by 4. This represents 1 character's average take of the loot per encounter.

There are 14 encounters per level, assuming a CR equal to the party. Multiply each result by 14. This represents what each member of a party will gain on that level.

Compare to the gain on DMG table 5-1 (Character Wealth by level). The difference between the wealth gained for a level, and the wealth increase between levels on that table, is the amount factored in at each level for consumables, sale of unwanted items at half value, and the like.

This results in the following "consumable/sale Allowance for each level (assuming a starting wealth of 150gp)
{table=Header]Level | Allowance | Allowance per encounter
1 | 300gp | 21gp, 4sp, 3cp
2 | 300gp | 21gp, 4sp, 3cp
3 | 450gp | 32gp, 1sp, 4cp
4 | 600gp | 42gp, 8sp, 6cp
5 | 1600gp | 114gp, 2sp, 9cp[/table]
Those are allowances for the first 5 levels. Now, this means that from level 1 to level 5? There isn't enough WBL to support using a 250gp potion on encounters. Using such items regularly will mean that you begin the next level with less than standard WBL. Which will put you behind at further levels.

This is why "UMD monk" is nonviable. By level 20, it'll have 300,000gp, whereas everyone else will have 760,000.

At level 5, the cost of a potion of enlarge is such that you couldn't use them on half of your encounters. This means it's the exception, not the rule. Which means that any argument of the "UMD monk's" self sufficiency in providing enlarge to himself prior to level 5 is an argument of the exception. As for purchasing a wand? The first time you can afford one off consumable wealth is a little over halfway into level 4. And that's the only consumable you'll have for the entire beginning of that level.

[Volkov]

That's not a Save vs. Fear, that's a Save vs. Awesome. DC: You lose, because it's still Awesome.

On a failed roll your head explodes from the sheer awesomeness, and even if you succeed, you can take no action but gape in awe.

[BRC]

Fine....fine....the wizard will take leadership, and have this druid as his cohort.
Two Words: Druidic Coup. Also, It's a well known fact that Wizards and people with Leadership are the most delicious, on account of all the cheese.

[Swok]

What exactly does this have to do with whether a monk or a fighter benefit more from size stacking provided by enlarge?
The question was not whether a monk can do the same damage output as a fighter at level x, but whether he benefits more from the size stacking effect of enlarge to damage dice.

- Giacomo
I could have sworn the question was "who benefits from enlarge person more" Not one specific part of enlarge person.

[Tyndmyr]

Also, It's a well known fact that Wizards and people with Leadership are the most delicious, on account of all the cheese.

My bad with the excessive Wizard cheese. I'll stick with the druid atop a T-Rex atop an F-14 henceforth.

[Yukitsu]

The theory focuses on "more attacks", but that doesn't pan out unless facing an opponent with sufficiently low AC that the monk's lower BaB doesn't penalize him heavily.

Also, the strength modifier for 2h weapons is a significant factor as well. You can scale to pretty much any absurd number you want, but so long as you're facing opponents of roughly equal power level, the fighter or barbarian wins.

The lack of epic unarmed damage scaling is also a problem, if you scale up far enough(ie, level 16+)

And frankly, the ability to face opponents significantly below your power level is a poor way to judge a class. The ability to kill things at or above it are more indicative of power.

I consider that though, and in all circumstances, a subtraction of AC will increase the value of the fighter or barb by contrast to the monk. Likewise with increases to AC, you still find the disparity favours the non-monk. The best range for monks is when the fighter or barb can't quite benefit from power attacking, but does hit automatically on the first hit.

[Sinfire Titan]

{Scrubbed}

[PhoenixRivers]

So...many...posts...overload...to....answer...them ...all...
:smallwink:
Seriously, I'll try to provide answers, but that may take time...and I'll need to sleep soon.

Quite frankly, I am surprised that so many still cling to the notion that monks are a subpar class after so many evidence, arguments and examples have already been given.

- Giacomo
Quite frankly, I'm surprised at how a couple people argue for months about something that the vast majority of people disagree with, and fail to take into account the following:

When 3 people, after evidence is shown, believe A is true... and 100 people, after evidence is shown, believe A is false...

Then either 3 people are misinterpreting something...
or 100 people are collectively misinterpreting the same thing in the same way.

Which is more likely?

[ScionoftheVoid]

Nok Mi'da'un, known to his friends as "With a feather", Human Cleric 1. Abilities: Str 14, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 8. Feats: Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Initiative. Domains: Strength and Destruction. Skills: Concentration 4 ranks, Hide 2 ranks (Cross-class). Spells/day; 3 Orisons, 2 1st level spells and 1 first level Domain spell. Basic prepared list: 2 castings of Guidance, 1 of Resistance, 1 of Sanctuary, 1 of Inflict Light Wounds and Domain slot used for Enlarge Person. Notable Special Abilities: Convert unused spell slots to appropriate Cure spells, Turn Undead, Enhancement bonus to Strength equal to Cleric level for 1 round per day, Smite once per day at +4 to-hit +Cleric level to damage.

"Prayer" is reflavoured to meditation, Turn Undead is not used, Smite, Spells, 1/day Strength boost et al reflavoured as focusing, encouragement, natural "presence" and similar.

Notable figures: +2 to-hit, 1d3+1 unarmed strike damage (bludgeoning). Same to-hit and plus 1d8+1 damage with Inflict Light Wounds (holding the charge), same to-hit 1d4+2 (could be plus one) when Enlarged, +6 to-hit 1d3+2 when smiting. Not very good yet, using Magic Stone is best for attacks at the moment, particularly if Enlarged. Sanctuary provides a reasonable defence at a DC 14 Will save at rounds/level. Monk probably wins this level, though this is not a particularly effective build, especially now. Saves of +4, +1 and +5 before Resistance, Grapple is +2 or +7 when Enlarged. Not too useful unless all effects are nova'd in one shot which gives +6 to-hit, 1d4+1d8+4 (or three, depending on how it rounds). The Fighter will be better than either at combat this level and the Barbarian is better still for one fight. HP is 10 this level.

Sorry about the rather disorganised numbers under notable figures but that's just as it came to me with minimal reference, there are certainly better combatants at the moment. Will probably update tomorrow, will add level five numbers sometime soon as well.

[PhoenixRivers]

Nok, above, also (assuming 4 encounters per day) has the benefit of effectively 3 enlarge person spells. That's 750gp the monk has to spend to match that one spell slot.

[AslanCross]

I keep them as is (albeit give them the unarmed strike proficiency). All my players know they suck and would rather take Swordsage levels.

I still use the Monk for class dips for villains.

[Sinfire Titan]

Which is more likely?


You're giving him an option in this matter?

[AtwasAwamps]

My bad with the excessive Wizard cheese. I'll stick with the druid atop a T-Rex atop an F-14 henceforth.

Indeed. Druid + T-Rex + Fighter Jet = Finest steak, not cheese.

[PhoenixRivers]

You're giving him an option in this matter?

Consider it a "test to determine his ability to process odds and statistics". If he doesn't have that ability, it's pointless to argue.

You don't argue with anyone who thinks that the following, free of additional explanation or justification, are equally likely:
2+2=4
2+2=toast

[ericgrau]

FWIW the monks I have seen in play were unmodified, unmodified, unintentionally nerfed (intent was unmodified), and in my recent group they are banned for being OP. Yeah, you read that last one right.

I know that doesn't fit everyone, especially not those on these boards, but that covers all 3 different groups I've been in. That ought to throw your statistics for a loop lol.

[Sinfire Titan]

Consider it a "test to determine his ability to process odds and statistics". If he doesn't have that ability, it's pointless to argue.

You don't argue with anyone who thinks that the following, free of additional explanation or justification, are equally likely:
2+2=4


Ok. Just checking.


2+2=toast

Close. 2+3=Chair.

[AmberVael]

What exactly does this have to do with whether a monk or a fighter benefit more from size stacking provided by enlarge?
The question was not whether a monk can do the same damage output as a fighter at level x, but whether he benefits more from the size stacking effect of enlarge to damage dice.

- Giacomo
Firstly, it demonstrates that you're fiddling with the equation to your advantage. With the addition and subtraction of important variables, the equation will change- while yes, the monk is gaining more by that equation, the addition of power attack alone actually makes the fighter's gain from enlarge much more significant (nearly doubling from 3.5 to 6.5).

Secondly, it shows that even with the addition of Enlarge, monk will be doing no more than attempting to match the fighter in terms of damage. It gives an actual comparison, placing the idea of net gain into a context. Who cares if one person has 100% gain and the other has 50% gain if they both end up in the same place? Or if the latter ends up being better anyway? Maybe it would be more efficient for the wizard to target the Monk with an enlarge if he had to choose, or maybe it would be better for Monk to buy items of enlarge than a Fighter- but does that really matter if Monk isn't going to be as good either way?

In short, it turns theoretical, context-less information into facts and evidence closer to actual practice. Which certainly matters a lot more.

[BRC]

Consider it a "test to determine his ability to process odds and statistics". If he doesn't have that ability, it's pointless to argue.

You don't argue with anyone who thinks that the following are equally likely:
2+2=4
2+2=toast
2+2 does indeed equal Toast.
(1)Wheat
(2)Dough
(3) Bread
(4) Toast


Really, Dnd is such a mix of generalizations, different circumstances, personal viewpoints, tangled numbers, incorrect assumptions, slang, luck, independent experiences, different thought processes, conflicting rules, and a million other things for anybody to be guaranteed "Wrong" about anything.


If I were to re-build (or tweak) The Monk, I would give it the role of a supporting melee combatant, focused on hampering an enemies ability to fight. Make them specialize in Disarms, Trips, and grapple checks. Give them some more stunning-fist type debuff stuff, maybe let them use Wis for Con, drop or modify Flurry. They are kind of going that direction already, and it's a nice role for them to play.
But that's off topic.

Also
Combat is Roleplaying
Int Penalties are Strength Bonuses
Dominate Person is Freedom of Movement

2+2=5

[PhoenixRivers]

Close. 2+3=Chair.

Only for large values of "barstool".

[Kaiyanwang]

FWIW the monks I have seen in play were unmodified, unmodified, unintentionally nerfed (intent was unmodified), and in my recent group they are banned for being OP. Yeah, you read that last one right.


:smalleek:

See, I'm really, really fine with 3.5. And no, I never had balance issue or similar things I read on these boards.

But..but.. overpowered monks..

[LemonFarmer]

i like to play unmodified pf monks in 3.5 campaigns because it makes them playable

[PhoenixRivers]

2+2 does indeed equal Toast.
(1)Wheat
(2)Dough
(3) Bread
(4) Toast

Hence, why "free from explanations or qualifiers" was added (15 minutes prior to your post, at that). Further, you'd have better luck with "2 pieces of bread" and "2 slots in a toaster". That would make sense. As opposed to 4 things, leaving out the many other things, such as water, a mechanism to grind wheat to flour, a heat source, a cutting tool, and a second heat source.

[Sinfire Titan]

Only for large values of "barstool".

I take it you've never watched Shorties Watching Shorties?

[Sir Giacomo]

Hmm. Tyndmyr first...


I have no idea where to look this up. The query "joker monk" returns this thread, followed by a number of threads in which you argued about the viability of monks. I see no list of build or consumables.

Here is the link to the joker monk build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704) I once did.


No proficiency and partial bab is pretty harsh. It's quite clear that a fighter, barbarian, or any proper tripping build is vastly better at this. Fighters also have more feats, so it's easier for them to pick up this trick, and still be competent in other things.

Again: trip attacks are touch attacks. The only thing that matters are the opposed STR check mods.
And it is not easier for fighters to pick up this feat, but it costs them INT 13 (15 when going for the STR-boosting races in core) and another feat.
The fighter's advantage, though, is to get the improved trip faster when they so wish.
And a fighter has to spend a lot of feats to emulate all the abilities the monk has (and actually some he can never emulate with feats at all).


So, since they can actually hit, then yes, enlarge would help another reach weapon tripper more than a monk.

As shown, hitting plays a minor role in tripping - at least the part where BAB is relevant for touch attacks. Actually, since many opponents also use concealment, a monk with his higher no. of attacks has more chances to trip per round and is ahead here as well.


Monks are more mad than fighters, etc. Once the fighter or barb hits int 13, he's done. He can afford to have lower con due to higher hit die. The monk is less able to focus on strength.

And the MAD myth gets repeated again and again - in spite of all the evidence already piled up ... the monk can focus completely on STR without any problem.


Who cares? A gaming mat is only so big. Your fighter or barbarian has no difficulty getting in position unless he's small, or slowed, or other unusual conditions apply.

Funniest opinion so far in this thread I guess.
Player: "Hey, why can't my fighter have a greatsword?"
DM: "I do not have any fighter miniature with a greatsword. You have to be the axe-wielder here. And since it is an orc, that's your race btw."


Or shield, or greater mage armor, or whatever. Getting a +4 armor bonus is easy.

It is, actually. Which is why the advantage to wear armour is getting less and less important at higher levels.


Hell, if you're comparing monks belt and a pile of wisdom on a monk....that works just as well for any other unarmored char.

Er...stunning fist? Spot/listen/sense motive skills?


Nobody cares if it's non-core. Fighters have more feats.

Which is good. But it leads to different strengths and weaknesses.


Yeah, it's probably a weak build, but that's because using weapons is superior. What's the point of making a fighter-monk when you can make a fighter that would one shot either a monk or a fake monk with one swing?

Now whole-heartedly agree. Again, a fighter has different strengths and weaknesses than a monk.


Yay for features like being an outsider, or getting a 1/week death attack. With an easy save. And requiring a hit. On a class with partial BaB and that happens to be MAD.
They get stuff...it's just really bad stuff.

It is small wonder that you think the monk class is weak when you leave most of its class abilities out of the equation.


It's "the monk is ok when he has caster support". It isn't pointing out the strengths of monk, it's pointing out the strengths of UMD.

No, it is pointing out the strengths of buff synergy with monk class abilities that you get with buffs that you can get with UMD. I do not think there is anything to misunderstand here.


Spiked chains tactics beat grappling tactics, because you take an AoO on the way in. Stand Still, for example, will ensure that you never have an opportunity to actually grapple.

But spiked chain tactics do not always beat grappling tactics. Sometimes grappling tactics are better, sometimes spiked chain is better. The game is too varied to say which is superior in most campaigns.
When including stand still you go non-core and a whole variety of additional grappling options and boosts are available (like, for instance, boosts to unarmed damage).


Also, grapplers are horrible unless on a team with an action economy advantage.

No, they are also just great in 1:1 combat.


So, you're comparing the monk with his feats vs the fighter without his. Good job.

I never did that. I only point out that size increasing effects stack better for monks than for fighters.
Actually you compare the fighter with the monk by leaving out most monk abilities (e.g. better saves and other defensive qualities).


PS: Monk unarmed progression stops at 20. Thanks to your level 15 comparison, and +5 from the belt, you're comparing at the highest level of damage your monk will get. Ever.

But I compare the highest level of damage dice the monk will ever get with the highest damage dice the fighter gets in core.
6d8 beats 3d6. Rock hard fact. No way around that.


The theory focuses on "more attacks", but that doesn't pan out unless facing an opponent with sufficiently low AC that the monk's lower BaB doesn't penalize him heavily.

Since a lot of fighter damage depends on lowering to hit for Power attack bonuses, I am not sure whether a monk will hit less often than a fighter.
Also, lvl 20 monk BAB: 15/15/15/10/5, for a total of 60 vs
lvl 20 fighter BAB: 20/15/10/5 for a total of 50.
Doesn't this tell you something?


Also, the strength modifier for 2h weapons is a significant factor as well. You can scale to pretty much any absurd number you want, but so long as you're facing opponents of roughly equal power level, the fighter or barbarian wins.

Well, they should have more damage output than the monk, since the monk has better defenses and better skills.


The lack of epic unarmed damage scaling is also a problem, if you scale up far enough(ie, level 16+)

Well, I would not exactly dare to comment on class balance in epic areas.


And frankly, the ability to face opponents significantly below your power level is a poor way to judge a class. The ability to kill things at or above it are more indicative of power.

As I showed above with the level 5 and 10 monks vs CR 5 and CR 10 encounters in core.


If you're using any item 10 times in a day, the cost will be significant. Also, minimum caster level leaves you highly vulnerable to dispell, and with short buff durations.

Two comments:
- a 1st level spell from wand costs 15gp per use. That is not a fortune for mid-levels&up
- dispels from monster opponents and even npcs are quite rare since rarely this is the best strategy available to them in combat.


So, casting is quite clearly superior to UMD if you intend to use it significantly. And hey, you could always use both if pulling from many odd sources is important to you.

It is overall superior, of course, but
- it may have more limit in a single day and
- taking a caster level and becoming a multi-class means you give up a higher level ability(ies) of the monk class (say, when deciding whether to go from level 11 to level 12 in monk gaining dimension door, a 4th level effect, and higher unarmed damage, or rather going monk 11/sorcerer 1st level and getting several 1st level spells)
And since I refer to core rules so often by now it is quite strange to hint that I am pulling the basis of my arguments on "many odd sources".


A fighter will have a low WIS score. If he wishes to fix it, the player visits the X to Y thread, and grabs a feat that solves the issue much more efficiently than throwing precious stats at it.

Yes, outside of core you can do a lot of things to focus on even just a single stat.
As can the monk (say, intuitive attack feat for WIS bonus to attack).


I'll build a non-monk melee char(probably fighter/barb) with the same point buy then. Nothing crazy, just a fighter that is demonstratably superior to a 28pt buy monk. Any source restrictions?

Outside core absurd stuff is possbile for both classes I guess (or the interpretation of "nothing crazy varies more widely)
Try it in core, normal wbl, pick any level. Pharaoh's Fist was the last to try even with a multi-class build and failed.
Again note that superiority in combat should be expected since them monk can also fulfill a secondary scout role (and/or has better defenses vs magic).


An unarmored monk and an unarmored fighter get exactly the same thing out of mage armor.
A fighter merely also has the ability to wear armor without losing his class features.

Yes. See above my separation into buffs that relatively benefit the monk more (as mage armour and divine power) and those that absolutely benefit the monk more (enlarge, owl's wisdom).


Size is size. It helps everyone. Reach matters more for builds that exploit it, AoOs, and other related feats. Monks do this poorly. Monks do get better unarmed die, though. I consider this a draw.

Again. Size stacks damage best for monks. It helps everyone, but the monk most. And a rogue definitely suffers from more size.
Reach can be exploited by a monk who gets combat reflexes and improved trip as bonus feats as well. Complete with spiked chain.
Monk wins, although it is a close one vs a fighter who chooses improved trip, combat reflexes and improved grapple as well. But most fighters will not have all those feats - those are special builds (and even they lose vs the monk, due to the better size damage boost for the monk).


You're casting level 6 spells off scrolls now? With cross class UMD? After all, AMF is a self-only spell.

It does not matter whether I cast 6 spells from scroll, or some from scroll and some from wands and some from items. When those buffs are used, the monk makes best use of them.


What other melee classes DONT use tumble?

Those that do not raise tumble as a skill, I guess.


We've already pointed out that movement doesn't really matter much. Any level at which you have access to these, a caster will not be merely standing on the ground, casually looking the other way while you run at him.

Since it is a turn-by-turn game, that is exactly what the wizard will be doing on the monk's turn (except in case where he will ready an action, not always a good idea). Or a contingency and other powerful protective magic is at work - but again there are countertactics for that and so on...


It is stationary once created.
So...you can sneak around it in quickly? What? You can create it and run out of it faster?

Obscuring mist is 20ft radius, 40ft diameter. The monk can go through the whole diameter in a move action. It may be in a confined space (that just before you pointed out as the standard here), where the ability to cross the whole area with just one move action can be helpful.
Also, when moving silently through this (the whole point of such a tactics combined with stealth), then your speed is reduced by half or you get a penalty. Again, monk advantage.


True. However, they wouldn't bother casting it. They'd use Bear's Strength instead, which is an equivalent, and end up still more powerful than you.

That is a very strange comparison imo.
So fighters make better use of owl's wisdom because they drink a potion of bull's strength?

- Giacomo

[Yukitsu]

Oh gods, formatting... :smalleek:

[Gametime]

So, to recap:

1. Monks are good because they can have Mage Armor cast on them, instead of using normal armor, which is bad because it has armor check penalties and dexterity limitations
2. Monks are good because they can focus entirely on strength, thus having a low dexterity and wisdom and rendering the drawback of a dexterity limitation no drawback at all.
3. Profit!

I must say, this is the most entertaining monk thread I've ever seen. Not because there are any new ideas being introduced to the actual discussion, but because the tired debate is interspersed with discussion of epic dinosaur-accompanied druids on fighter jets.

[Sir Giacomo]

WBL assessment:

A certain amount of treasure is incorporated into the treasure tables to account for sale of unused gear, and purchase of new gear, as well as consumables. This is able to be calculated, thusly.

Take the Average treasure per encounter table in the DMG (table 3-1), and divide each result by 4. This represents 1 character's average take of the loot per encounter.

There are 14 encounters per level, assuming a CR equal to the party. Multiply each result by 14. This represents what each member of a party will gain on that level.

Compare to the gain on DMG table 5-1 (Character Wealth by level). The difference between the wealth gained for a level, and the wealth increase between levels on that table, is the amount factored in at each level for consumables, sale of unwanted items at half value, and the like.

This results in the following "consumable/sale Allowance for each level (assuming a starting wealth of 150gp)
{table=Header]Level | Allowance | Allowance per encounter
1 | 300gp | 21gp, 4sp, 3cp
2 | 300gp | 21gp, 4sp, 3cp
3 | 450gp | 32gp, 1sp, 4cp
4 | 600gp | 42gp, 8sp, 6cp
5 | 1600gp | 114gp, 2sp, 9cp[/table]
Those are allowances for the first 5 levels. Now, this means that from level 1 to level 5? There isn't enough WBL to support using a 250gp potion on encounters. Using such items regularly will mean that you begin the next level with less than standard WBL. Which will put you behind at further levels.

This is why "UMD monk" is nonviable. By level 20, it'll have 300,000gp, whereas everyone else will have 760,000.

At level 5, the cost of a potion of enlarge is such that you couldn't use them on half of your encounters. This means it's the exception, not the rule. Which means that any argument of the "UMD monk's" self sufficiency in providing enlarge to himself prior to level 5 is an argument of the exception. As for purchasing a wand? The first time you can afford one off consumable wealth is a little over halfway into level 4. And that's the only consumable you'll have for the entire beginning of that level.

You repeat Talic's old mistake.
Wbl assumes that some of the treasure gained is used for consumable items and thus the wbl level table shows LESS gold pieces than what the average encounter treasures would yield (hence, the wbl table is only BASED on the treasure gained).
This difference by no means though constitutes any kind of hint that wbl cannot be used at all for consumable items beyond this allowance that you calculated.
For instance, a wand of divine power for 21,000 gold is a powerful magic item - not something that the system assumes you just use in daily business like a potion of CLW. By your logic, you could not buy one even though your wbl allows it.
As such, the joker monk (or any character) is free to use his wbl to spend on wands and other consumable items like powerful scrolls to his heart's content.
For instance, with only 15,000 gold you can cast enlarge from a wand 1,000 times. Assuming 14 encounters per level gained (or 280 encountes until level 20), you'll only need roughly a QUARTER of these enlarge buffs in a whole campaign.
That's why the joker monk just works fine. As was shown repeatedly in the link I provided above.

- Giacomo

PS: I think I give up replying to all comments - they come up faster than I can hope to reply.:smallfrown:

[Forever Curious]

So, to recap:

1. Monks are good because they can have Mage Armor cast on them, instead of using normal armor, which is bad because it has armor check penalties and dexterity limitations
2. Monks are good because they can focus entirely on strength, thus having a low dexterity and wisdom and rendering the drawback of a dexterity limitation no drawback at all.
3. Profit!

I must say, this is the most entertaining monk thread I've ever seen. Not because there are any new ideas being introduced to the actual discussion, but because the tired debate is interspersed with discussion of epic dinosaur-accompanied druids on fighter jets.

This. Q.E.D.

[ZeroNumerous]

PS: I think I give up replying to all comments - they come up faster than I can hope to reply.:smallfrown:

There is a reason for that.

[PhoenixRivers]

You repeat Talic's old mistake.
Wbl assumes that some of the treasure gained is used for consumable items and thus the wbl level table shows LESS gold pieces than what the average encounter treasures would yield (hence, the wbl table is only BASED on the treasure gained).
This difference by no means though constitutes any kind of hint that wbl cannot be used at all for consumable items beyond this allowance that you calculated.
Well, other than, perhaps, starting with 900gp, gaining 2000gp, spending 1700gp, and still expecting to be at 2700gp?


For instance, a wand of divine power for 21,000 gold is a powerful magic item - not something that the system assumes you just use in daily business like a potion of CLW. By your logic, you could not buy one even though your wbl allows it.You can buy it. However, if you use it in 50 encounters, and you gain less than 21000gp in those 50 encounters, you lose money, and fall behind the party.

In short, you end up with a monk that has 300,000gp at level 20, while all the other people who didn't blow their gold on candy and beef jerky have 760,000gp.


As such, the joker monk (or any character) is free to use his wbl to spend on wands and other consumable items like powerful scrolls to his heart's content.Provided he is cool with being drastically behind WBL, yes, yes he is.

For instance, with only 15,000 gold you can cast enlarge from a wand 1,000 times. Assuming 14 encounters per level gained (or 280 encountes until level 20), you'll only need roughly a QUARTER of these enlarge buffs in a whole campaign.And this helps you in level 1-5 how? You know, before you HAVE 15,000gp?

That's why the joker monk just works fine. As was shown repeatedly in the link I provided above.And debunked repeatedly. Your build loses money as fast as it makes it.

[Sinfire Titan]

And debunked repeatedly. Your build loses money as fast as it makes it.

Hell, his Joker Monk is full of holes anyway. I just pointed out a minimum of 3 CR1s with a higher Grapple modifier than his build. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143969)

Kinda hard to call yourself the best CR1 Grappler there is when an Orc Fighter can get an even higher Grapple bonus.

[Sir Giacomo]

Holy Tzeentch, the ignorance in that line is blinding me.


Giacomo, have you ever noticed that in every Monk thread you've ever posted in, 6 people reply to that post rebuking you and your claims within 25 minutes? And that every time it happens, at least one of these people posts mathematical evidence proving their arguments correct?


Has it ever crossed your mind, even once, that these people are correct about the Monk and your posts?

OK, I have said it before and I say it again:
It does not matter whether a large majority (often of the same posters) repeat their arguments again and again which are sort of the mainstream opinion - but which I have disproven so often.
I do convince more and more people of my viewpoint, but it is a stony road I guess.

The problem is that the monk-doubting side simply does not convince me when they back up their opinions with things like "90% of the wbl your joker monk build is used for consumable items"; "hey, OK size stacks more for damage for monks but enlarge still gives fighters an edge because they get +2 STR (and thus +2 damage) for power attack" (WHAT?), "spiked chain is always superior to grapple", "monk does not hit with his higher number of attacks" etc.

And that every time a (mostly within core rules) challenge is made like
- "build a monk that can take on an ancient white dragon"
- "build a monk that is best at grappling", complete with playtest
- "build a monk that is a viable tank", complete with playtest (still ongoing)
- "build a monk that can do 300 damage per round in level 15"
- "build a monk that can overcome Frank Trollman's core CR 5 challenges and these CR 10 challenges"
- "build a monk that can use all of the buffs and skills and combat resilience you claim"
I do all these with success (imo) and it still is not enough, apparently.

This is the reason why the monk-doubting side does not convince me (yet), and neither do you, Sinfire Titan.

Will go to bed now...

- Giacomo

PS: And no, PhoenixRivers, the joker monk is NOT based on the assumption that the gold he spends for consumable items is somehow replaced in his total wbl. It is deducted, like all items bought.
And when he uses divine power 50 times (or for encounters worth more than 3 levels) he gets roughly the same use out it as a character that got a different, permanent item for 21,000 which has the benefit to be still there when the divine power is used up.
So the joker monk is NEVER behind in wbl, since everyone gets the same wbl.

PPS: Good idea, Sinfire Titan, to start a separate thread discussing my old joker monk build - otherwise this thread could get derailed with discussing just a specific monk build.

[ZeroNumerous]

"hey, OK size stacks more for damage for monks but enlarge still gives fighters an edge because they get +2 STR (and thus +2 damage) for power attack" (WHAT?)

Lets look at your Monk's damage output at level 10. Let us assume he has Enlarge Person, Improved Natural Attacks and a Monk's Belt. His fists go from 2d6 base to 3d6 due to Large and then to 4d6 due to INA. He swings three times for +7/7/2. Let us assume your Monk has 22 Strength for +13/13/8 and 4d6+6.

Let us look at a Level 10 Fighter. Let us assume he has Enlarge Person, Power Attack, a pair of Boots of Speed and a mundane Greatsword. He goes from Base 2d6 to 3d6 due to Large. He swings twice at +10/5. Let us assume the Fighter also has 22 Strength. This puts him at +16/11 for 2d6+9.

Assume the Monk and the Fighter are attacking an Eleven-Headed Hydra(a CR10). Assume that they are flanking with one another. The Fighter activates his Boots of Speed and Power Attacks for 3. The Monk flurries. They now both swing +15/15/10(due to flanking and PA increasing/reducing to-hit respectively).

They hit on a 6/6/11. Let us assume an average of 10, and thus two hits for both of them. The fighter hits for 4d6+30(+9 from STR, +6 from PA) and the monk hits for 8d6+12. This averages to 40(28+12) for the Monk and 44(14+30) for the Fighter.

I ask you: Who is the better attacker? Both are using nothing but a buff, a feat and 13,000 GP in items. The Fighter even has money to spare. The difference in their damage only widens with the assumption that all three attacks hit(60 for the Monk and 66 for the Fighter).


, "spiked chain is always superior to grapple",

Martial Study(Anything in in Devoted Spirit. Honestly, whatever. It doesn't matter). Martial Stance(Thicket of Blades). At level 6 you cannot get close to a Spiked Chain wielder who expends -2-(two; two) feats without getting smacked per 5 feet you travel. One of those attacks will be a trip. A trip check you will lose and then be unable to close the distance. The spiked chain wielder can simply basic single-attack you, move away and be ready to repeat the next round.


"monk does not hit with his higher number of attacks"

On average, that is a result of 10 on a d20, the monk will hit with only 2 to 3 of his attacks(those being the ones sharing his highest attack bonus). Other attacks might hit, but they might not. These chancy attacks aren't worth betting on.

[Yukitsu]

Here is the link to the joker monk build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704) I once did.

As noted, to simply function it spends gob heaps of cash, and is only really borderline competent at basic melee functions.


Again: trip attacks are touch attacks. The only thing that matters are the opposed STR check mods.
And it is not easier for fighters to pick up this feat, but it costs them INT 13 (15 when going for the STR-boosting races in core) and another feat.
The fighter's advantage, though, is to get the improved trip faster when they so wish.
And a fighter has to spend a lot of feats to emulate all the abilities the monk has (and actually some he can never emulate with feats at all).

List the abilities the fighter should care to emulate. Just because someone has an ability does not mean the ability is relevant to emulate.

Next of all, tripping is also dependant on the damage you, or someone else can deal, as the manuever is next to useless without the ability to capitolize on it. A +4 to hit and reduced change of being hit generally favours the fighter. (8 extra damage compared to +20% hit means you need average damage of 40 assuming only 1 fighter attack after DR. At level 1.)


And the MAD myth gets repeated again and again - in spite of all the evidence already piled up ... the monk can focus completely on STR without any problem.

At the cost of all class features, and more importantly to HP. Con is still important, especially since you, in this explicit statement, are dumping AC stats. And inversely, it's not that strength focus is going to directly cause problems, what you'll find is that you're ignoring a great number of your class features, and are now failing to UMD.


It is, actually. Which is why the advantage to wear armour is getting less and less important at higher levels.

Unless you fully focus on that matter.


Er...stunning fist? Spot/listen/sense motive skills?

DM: You're walking through the woods. Make spot checks.
Player: I drink a potion of owl's wisdom.
DM: that's metagaming. Cross potions off for the entire duration of this trip.
Player: Goodbye 100,000 GP.


It is small wonder that you think the monk class is weak when you ignore most of its class abilities.

We ignore them because you assume no MAD. Either you have them and are MAD, or do not relevantly have them, and are not. But you can't have it both ways.


No, it is pointing out the strengths of buff synergy with monk class abilities that you get with buffs that you can get with UMD. I do not think there is anything to misunderstand here.

I can take the same value of money on an equal PB fighter, often using the same items and wind up with more damage per round, I can guarantee it.


But spiked chain tactics do not always beat grappling tactics. Sometimes grappling tactics are better, sometimes spiked chain is better. The game is too varied to say which is superior in most campaigns.
When including stand still you go non-core and a whole variety of additional grappling options and boosts are available (like, for instance, boosts to unarmed damage).

No one said all core. And please name a practical point where one is relevant (grapple or trip) but not the other.


No, they are also just great in 1:1 combat.

Every time you try to give an example of this (for isntance the solar) you ignore all of the creatures racial abilities/casting, and assume that your 50% hide/move silent success rate will net you a surprise round from beyond the charge range of the thing that has higher initiative than you.


I never did that. I only point out that size increasing effects stack better for monks than for fighters.
Actually you compare the fighter with the monk by leaving out most monk abilities (e.g. better saves and other defensive qualities).

Different contrasts.

2d6+6 changed to 3d6+7. 1d6+4 changed to 1d8+5. One goes up 4.5 per hit, the other by 2. The monk starts "catching up" later, but at those later levels the baseline moves more in favour of the fighter as weapon upgrades cause average damage per round to more than equal the unarmed strike bonuses even when enlarged.

As for two strikes for the monk yes, but you have to reduce the damage by 15%, or increase weapon damage by 6, to 2d6+12 compared to 2d6+8 and 3d6+13 compared to 2d8+10.


Yes. I compare the highest level of damage dice the monk will ever get with the highest damage dice the fighter gets in core. Ever.
6d8 beats 3d6. Rock hard fact. No way around that.

Actually at that level, you can't be enlarged anyway, so no dice on that. 4d8 is what you can get with level 20 and improved natural attack, or you can have both and be level 19. Either way, your 18 damage from dice compared to a "mere" 10.5 from the greatsword doesn't account for several things. At level 20, I'll assume the piddly strength of 22, because higher numbers make monks look even worse, so monks get 24 damage per hit. Fighters get 19.5, and unlike a monk have 5 more BAB, so another 10 from PA. 29.5. That's one feat required in both cases, so it's just damage right now.

I can run the rest of the tag ons for both sides, but the fighter always will turn out ahead in terms of DPS. Any money you throw on the monk, I can throw on the fighter, and get a bigger bang for the buck.


Since a lot of fighter damage depends on lowering to hit for Power attack bonuses, I am not sure whether a monk will hit less often than a fighter.

The fighter decreases BAB only when it will increase his damage per round. This only occurs when he either needs 20 to hit anyway, or when he hits on a 1 or less. He gains damage from power attack certainly, but he also gains damage bonuses from weapons and other feats, such as shock trooper. Though I guess that's power attack too.


Also, lvl 20 monk BAB: 15/15/15/10/5, for a total of 60 vs
lvl 20 fighter BAB: 20/15/10/5 for a total of 50.
Doesn't this tell you something?

No, because that's not how those numbers work. Especially when one side works on a few really hard hitting hits (fighters) while monks rely on many non-damaging attacks.


Well, they should have more damage output than the monk, since the monk has better defenses and better skills.

Care to prove that? Armour works to the same value, you mentioned in the MAD clause that you need not boost strength, and in that case, armour is superior. Saves are only superior if the fighter does nothing to increase will, or if you care about reflex for some reason.


As I showed above with the level 5 and 10 monks vs CR 5 and CR 10 encounters in core.

Where? You just list a small sample of possible CR 5 and 10 encounters and list how you think you could beat them, with no running or playing through of those suppositions. All you've done is demonstrate that you think a monk will beat those encounters.


Two comments:
- a 1st level spell from wand costs 15gp per use. That is not a fortune for mid-levels&up
- dispels from monster opponents and even npcs are quite rare since rarely this is the best strategy available to them in combat.

The second is circular reasoning to a degree. The dispel isn't normally effective because people rarely chug back low level potions and rely on them as their sole means of competence. However, if people do do so, dispel becomes a very functional tactic.


Yes, outside of core you can do a lot of things to focus on even just a single stat.
As can the monk (say, intuitive attack feat for WIS bonus to attack).

That's a trap. You can focus on wisdom to an absurd degree, but you can kiss your DPS goodbye. That's no better than using a ton of dex and weapon finesse.


Outside core absurd stuff is possbile for both classes I guess (or the interpretation of "nothing crazy varies more widely)
Try it in core, normal wbl, pick any level. Pharaoh's Fist was the last to try even with a multi-class build and failed.
Again note that superiority in combat should be expected since them monk can also fulfill a secondary scout role (and/or has better defenses vs magic).

That's rather moving things a bit. You're basically saying here "Fighters and etc are admittedly better at fighting, but monks are better at other things that fighters don't have to ever deal with." That's like saying paladins are better than wizards because paladins can use divine magic, while arcanists are stuck with that whole arcane schtick.

If you want to compare the monk to an inferior yet decent fighter, who is otherwise well rounded, compare him to a rogue, not a fighter, or to a bard. Neither being core, because core rogues are nerfed by their inability to use their primary combat class feature pretty much ever, and core only bards don't have any real melee abilities.


Yes. See above my separation into buffs that relatively benefit the monk more (as mage armour and divine power) and those that absolutely benefit the monk more (enlarge, owl's wisdom).

In theory, it's cheaper in the long run to not use mage armour. You're looking at the buff in a vacuum, but forgetting that in a non-MAD build that is expected to deal damage, AC is ignorable.


Again. Size stacks damage best for monks. It helps everyone, but the monk most. And a rogue definitely suffers from more size.
Reach can be exploited by a monk who gets combat reflexes and improved trip as bonus feats as well. Complete with spiked chain.
Monk wins, although it is a close one vs a fighter who chooses improved trip, combat reflexes and improved grapple as well. But most fighters will not have all those feats - those are special builds (and even they lose vs the monk, due to the better size damage boost for the monk).

They don't "lose" because monks have a better boost. Even if monks got a better boost, the fighter would still end up ahead, which is what matters.

Next, no monk I've seen has taken a spiked chain, probably because it doesn't add damage, and it requires a feat for the ability to lose all of your melee class features, such as the flurry which is the heart of your argument as far as being superior at tripping goes. 3 attacks at lower BAB compared to 4.


It does not matter whether I cast 6 spells from scroll, or some from scroll and some from wands and some from items. When those buffs are used, the monk makes best use of them.

No, a commoner with TWF makes the best gains from them, as he has the most to gain. However, this does not make him in any way good after he benefits from them.

You need to stop looking at gains in isolation, and look at the end result. It only matters if the end resultant monk deals more damage than the end resultant fighter who spends the same amount on different or the same items.


Those that do not raise tumble as a skill, I guess.

Common for people who want to brawl it out and use their flurry.


Since it is a turn-by-turn game, that is exactly what the wizard will be doing on the monk's turn (except in case where he will ready an action, not always a good idea).

In the case of wizards, it is not the case that you should ask what they will be doing in response to you during your turn, what you need to ask, is what did they do prior to my turn to pre-empt me from functioning. Moving away and behind a shred of terrain will prevent any charge in core, most charges outside core, and will also prevent someone from walking up to him and then hitting him without the charge.


That is a very strange comparison.
So fighters make better use of owl's wisdom because they drink a potion of bull's strength? Huh?

the point is, it's a directly analogous value. The fighter gets more from the money than the monk can.

[PhoenixRivers]

PS: And no, PhoenixRivers, the joker monk is NOT based on the assumption that the gold he spends for consumable items is somehow replaced in his total wbl. It is deducted, like all items bought.
And when he uses divine power 50 times (or for encounters worth more than 3 levels) he gets roughly the same use out it as a character that got a different, permanent item for 21,000 which has the benefit to be still there when the divine power is used up.Wanna bet?

When you use all 50 charges of that wand, what do you have left?
A worthless stick.

That's what a consumable is. You use it, and it's gone.
The person who buys the permanent item, once you've used your wand, has 21,000gp more WBL than you. Why? BECAUSE HE DIDN'T BLOW HIS ON BUBBLEGUM AND SODA POP.


So the joker monk is NEVER behind in wbl, since everyone gets the same wbl.Everyone gets the same treasure per encounter. If one person spends 420gp per encounter, and another spends 0gp per encounter, then the second will end 1 encounter with 420 more gp. After 4 encounters, the second will have 1680gp more.

Why do I use 420gp? Because that's the cost per charge of a wand of Divine Power. That is what you spend each time you spend permanent resources for a temporary benefit. That's what you lose permanently for temporary gain.

In other words, if you assume that every character has equal WBL at all levels, regardless of how much each character spends, you assume that the DM steps in and gives more treasure per encounter to characters that spend more. In other words, you assume DM help to balance an unbalanced class.

[faceroll]

Martial Study(Anything in in Devoted Spirit. Honestly, whatever. It doesn't matter). Martial Stance(Thicket of Blades). At level 6 you cannot get close to a Spiked Chain wielder who expends -2-(two; two) feats without getting smacked per 5 feet you travel. One of those attacks will be a trip. A trip check you will lose and then be unable to close the distance. The spiked chain wielder can simply basic single-attack you, move away and be ready to repeat the next round.

Unless you've got magical flight.

[Sinfire Titan]

And when he uses divine power 50 times (or for encounters worth more than 3 levels) he gets roughly the same use out it as a character that got a different, permanent item for 21,000 which has the benefit to be still there when the divine power is used up.
So the joker monk is NEVER behind in wbl, since everyone gets the same wbl.

Except that once you've used those 50 charges, you still have to get through 216 more encounters. You'd need a grand total of 5.32 Wands of Divine Power just to get through all 266 encounters, never mind the fact that you don't even have a 50% chance of activating the wand until 4th level or so (or the fact that you can't even buy the damn wand until 13th). I mean, seriously, you could at least use a Minor Schema or a Scepter...


So, what would one of your Monks do for those 216 Encounters where he doesn't have his precious Wand of Divine Power? I'm putting my money on "Suck".



I ask you: Who is the better attacker? Both are using nothing but a buff, a feat and 13,000 GP in items. The Fighter even has money to spare. The difference in their damage only widens with the assumption that all three attacks hit(60 for the Monk and 66 for the Fighter).

And this is assuming the Fighter is barred from taking any feats other than Power Attack. A 10th level Human Fighter has 11 more feats to spend.

If all it takes to equal your [Giacomo's] damage output is a Fighter with 13K and a single feat, imagine what adding another 11 feats to the mix will do.

[dragonfan6490]

Due to this entire thread, as well as all Monk threads previously, I have come to a conclusion. Someone on the internet is wrong. Monk threads really seem to be pointless on these forums. Lets move on to a Clericzilla v. Druidzilla Thread. :smalltongue:

[ZeroNumerous]

Unless you've got magical flight.

Your reach is, surprisingly, 3D. You still get smacked per 5 feet you travel.

[Asheram]

Wanna bet?

When you use all 50 charges of that wand, what do you have left?
A worthless stick.

That's what a consumable is. You use it, and it's gone.
The person who buys the permanent item, once you've used your wand, has 21,000gp more WBL than you. Why? BECAUSE HE DIDN'T BLOW HIS ON BUBBLEGUM AND SODA POP.
Everyone gets the same treasure per encounter. If one person spends 420gp per encounter, and another spends 0gp per encounter, then the second will end 1 encounter with 420 more gp. After 4 encounters, the second will have 1680gp more.

Why do I use 420gp? Because that's the cost per charge of a wand of Divine Power. That is what you spend each time you spend permanent resources for a temporary benefit. That's what you lose permanently for temporary gain.

In other words, if you assume that every character has equal WBL at all levels, regardless of how much each character spends, you assume that the DM steps in and gives more treasure per encounter to characters that spend more. In other words, you assume DM help to balance an unbalanced class.

Let me just get this straight.

You're arguing this because you belive that it's more worth it to spend said money on a permanent physical representation of said money.

While giacomo believes that it doesn't matter if the object is permanent or not, as long as it, in theory, gets him atleast 1 use per encounter up to L20?

[ZeroNumerous]

Let me just get this straight.

You're arguing this because you belive that it's more worth it to spend said money on a permanent physical representation of said money.

While giacomo believes that it doesn't matter if the object is permanent or not, as long as it, in theory, gets him atleast 1 use per encounter up to L20?

Edit. Or actually, this is what Giacomo argues.

Actually, I think he's arguing that you make more money by buying bubblegum and soda pop factories instead of buying bubblegum and soda pop produced by other people... :smalltongue:

[Gametime]

In short, you end up with a monk that has 300,000gp at level 20, while all the other people who didn't blow their gold on candy and beef jerky have 760,000gp.


Now there's an interesting challenge: build a level 20 character who spends all 760,000 gp on candy and beef jerky, and have them duel a level 20 monk who has been spending his money on consumables.

(I'm kidding, of course - the jerky-man would win even if he lost, because beef jerky is delicious. It's a moral victory.)

[faceroll]

Your reach is, surprisingly, 3D. You still get smacked per 5 feet you travel.

This is the only place I can find flying and tripping:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060321a

here's srd on stalling:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#movingInThreeDimensions

[ZeroNumerous]

This is the only place I can find flying and tripping:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060321a

here's srd on stalling:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#movingInThreeDimensions

Which actually proves to be even more dangerous than charging, as you'll fall through more threatened spaces if you stall.

[Asheram]

Actually, I think he's arguing that you make more money by buying bubblegum and soda pop factories instead of buying bubblegum and soda pop produced by other people... :smalltongue:

True that. Don't forget, children. Every time a product changes hands, it's price is increased by about 100% until it's bought by a consumer.

[faceroll]

Which actually proves to be even more dangerous than charging, as you'll fall through more threatened spaces if you stall.

Let me point you towards this line:
"Creatures that fly without wings (and any creature with perfect maneuverability) can't be tripped while flying."

I have no idea where that rule is coming from, though. Did Skip make it up?

[Volkov]

@Giacomo
A level 30 fighter and his level 28 fighter cohort and their followers have some (as in a very small chance that should only ever happen due to dumb luck or munchkining on their part and/or a great lack of optimization on the druid's) chance against a level 30 druid in battletitan (MM3, first dinosaur to appear in the book) form and her tyrannosaurus rex pet and his level 28 druid cohort wildshaped into a battletitan dinosaur and his tyrannosaurus rex animal companion. A monk of the same level and his monk cohort and their followers have no shot, ever...period.

I am still awaiting for you to address this

[faceroll]

A level 30 fighter and his level 28 fighter chort has some (as in a very small chance that should only ever happen due to dumb luck or munchkining on their part and/or a lack of optimization on the druid's) chance against a level 30 druid in battletitan form and her tyrannosaurus rex pet. A monk of the same level and his monk cohort have no shot, ever...period.

Is epic magic in play?

If not, mass UMD GMW at druid followed by rays of stupidity. Or shivering touch. Or any other form of ability damage. The action advantage and wealth advantage of the fighters & monk should be able to do whatever they want to the druid.

Hell, they could all get into an enveloping pit inside a siege crab to avoid the initial crap storm of magical death coming from the druid.

Also, the druid won't get to automaitcally go first, since he can't be running around in dire tortoise form, as per your rules, and with that many monks/fighters running around, someone's bound to roll a natural 20.



...an army of monks in a clown car style siege crab all firing "bazookas" and "emps" would be a freaking epic encounter.

[Volkov]

Is epic magic in play?

If not, mass UMD GMW at druid followed by rays of stupidity. Or shivering touch. Or any other form of ability damage. The action advantage and wealth advantage of the fighters & monk should be able to do whatever they want to the druid.

Hell, they could all get into an enveloping pit inside a siege crab to avoid the initial crap storm of magical death coming from the druid.

Also, the druid won't get to automaitcally go first, since he can't be running around in dire tortoise form, as per your rules, and with that many monks/fighters running around, someone's bound to roll a natural 20.
Ahem, Battletitans aren't dire turtles. They are a good deal faster. And don't forget his cohort.

[Gametime]

Let me just get this straight.

You're arguing this because you belive that it's more worth it to spend said money on a permanent physical representation of said money.

While giacomo believes that it doesn't matter if the object is permanent or not, as long as it, in theory, gets him atleast 1 use per encounter up to L20?

Basically, although it's important to remember that the object won't get him one use per encounter up to level 20.

I don't think anyone would be contesting the worth of consumables being relied on in every fight if wands came with hundreds of charges each. Since they don't, they form a cost-ineffective way of shoring up permanent weaknesses. They're better relegated to spammable low-level spells (such as cure light wounds, which is cheap enough to be well worth it) or useful but situation spells that you don't expect to blow through rapidly (like fly, invisibility, and other utility spells in a party lacking a real arcane caster to do the buffing).

[faceroll]

Ahem, Battletitans aren't dire turtles. They are a good deal faster.

Meh. The siege crab is flying, so the land speed doesn't matter. Dire Turtles are sweet because they have an Ex. Foresight ability.


And don't forget his cohort.

I didn't see you mention a drood cohort anywhere. If the druid is using leadership, then yeah, the druid definitely wins. Otherwise, the druid is basically going to have to fight a caster who gets 100 actions/turn.

[Volkov]

Meh. The siege crab is flying, so the land speed doesn't matter. Dire Turtles are sweet because they have an Ex. Foresight ability.



I didn't see you mention a drood cohort anywhere. If the druid is using leadership, then yeah, the druid definitely wins. Otherwise, the druid is basically going to have to fight a caster who gets 100 actions/turn.

Ahem, morph into a red dragon and then firestorm the crab down. Then return to his battletitan form to maul the monk to death.

[Asheram]

Basically, although it's important to remember that the object won't get him one use per encounter up to level 20.

I don't think anyone would be contesting the worth of consumables being relied on in every fight if wands came with hundreds of charges each. Since they don't, they form a cost-ineffective way of shoring up permanent weaknesses. They're better relegated to spammable low-level spells (such as cure light wounds, which is cheap enough to be well worth it) or useful but situation spells that you don't expect to blow through rapidly (like fly, invisibility, and other utility spells in a party lacking a real arcane caster to do the buffing).

Oh, I get it, I just wasn't sure that Giacomo did. That's why I wanted to straighten it out.

[faceroll]

Ahem, morph into a red dragon and then firestorm the crab down. Then return to his battletitan form to maul the monk to death.

First we roll for initiative. Do you or do you not have around a 100 dudes with you? If you do, I concede, you win.

Otherwise, we roll initiative, and at least one of my guys is probably going first. Do you have protection from ability damage? One of my guys has (greater) arcane sight up and a lot of cross-class ranks in knowing that sort of thing. If not, you take a lot of ability damage. If you do, you get hit with a targeted chained GDM and/or twinned MDJ.

Also, don't you need to be level 36 to morph into a battletitan? It's got 36 hd.

A very large level 30 charger build with reach could easily KO you.

Really, being a dire tortoise is more advantageous, since you don't have to roll initiative.

[Volkov]

First we roll for initiative. Do you or do you not have around a 100 dudes with you? If you do, I concede, you win.

Otherwise, we roll initiative, and at least one of my guys is probably going first. Do you have protection from ability damage? One of my guys has (greater) arcane sight up and a lot of cross-class ranks in knowing that sort of thing. If not, you take a lot of ability damage. If you do, you get hit with a targeted chained GDM and/or twinned MDJ.

Also, don't you need to be level 36 to morph into a battletitan? It's got 36 hd.
Wait, where is the HD limit on your forms? I couldn't find it in my PHB.

[Idlewyld]

IIRC text overrides tables and the text under the description of UNARMED STRIKE for Monks clearly states that they can attack with their fists, etc. By the reasoning that it is on the simple weapons chart that you must have simple weapon prof clearly stated to use it is like saying that you still have to specify a weapon for weapon finesse because the superscript on the feats list says so even though the text doesn't support it.

[faceroll]

Wait, where is the HD limit on your forms? I couldn't find it in my PHB.

See polymorph.

[Volkov]

See polymorph.

Is wildshape affected by the same limits as polymorph? Because I was certain that the only limit was the size categories and types of creatures you could take the form of. Both of which could be fixed with epic feats.

[faceroll]

Is wildshape affected by the same limits as polymorph? Because I was certain that the only limit was the size categories and types of creatures you could take the form of. Both of which could be fixed with epic feats.

I was wrong; doesn't say anything about polymorph. Here's the text from the srd:

Wild Shape (Su)

At 5th level, a druid gains the ability to turn herself into any Small or Medium animal and back again once per day. Her options for new forms include all creatures with the animal type. This ability functions like the alternate form special ability, except as noted here. The effect lasts for 1 hour per druid level, or until she changes back. Changing form (to animal or back) is a standard action and doesn’t provoke an attack of opportunity. Each time you use wild shape, you regain lost hit points as if you had rested for a night.

Any gear worn or carried by the druid melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional. When the druid reverts to her true form, any objects previously melded into the new form reappear in the same location on her body that they previously occupied and are once again functional. Any new items worn in the assumed form fall off and land at the druid's feet.

The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with.

A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.)

A druid can use this ability more times per day at 6th, 7th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level, as noted on Table: The Druid. In addition, she gains the ability to take the shape of a Large animal at 8th level, a Tiny animal at 11th level, and a Huge animal at 15th level.

The new form’s Hit Dice can’t exceed the character’s druid level.

At 12th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a plant creature with the same size restrictions as for animal forms. (A druid can’t use this ability to take the form of a plant that isn’t a creature.)

At 16th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water) once per day. These elemental forms are in addition to her normal wild shape usage. In addition to the normal effects of wild shape, the druid gains all the elemental’s extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. She also gains the elemental’s feats for as long as she maintains the wild shape, but she retains her own creature type.

At 18th level, a druid becomes able to assume elemental form twice per day, and at 20th level she can do so three times per day. At 20th level, a druid may use this wild shape ability to change into a Huge elemental.

Note the bolded bit.

[Volkov]

I was wrong; doesn't say anything about polymorph. Here's the text from the srd:


Note the bolded bit.

Well in that case, I'd settle for a spinosaurus form.

[Yuki Akuma]

Just because it states they can attack with their fists doesn't mean they're proficient.

Anyone can attack with any weapon. You don't need to be proficient to do so.

Yes we are aware Monks should be proficient with their unarmed strike, and no one would make them eat the -4 penalty. It's just funny to discuss the obviously ridiculous notion that, due to how the rules work, monks are not proficient with their main class feature.

Okay? Okay!

[faceroll]

No. Ever seen two kids fight? Hair pulling is as good a tactic as punching for them. Someone with basic unarmed combat training will almost certainly defeat someone without it. I would not agree that everyone is automatically proficient at punching people.

RAW, it's pretty clear that they aren't.

Technically, monks are not proficient with their fists, yes..but this is likely an oversight, and is best ignored anyhow. Monks are weak enough as is.

Hair pulling is an awesome tactic. It allows you to control your opponent. Same with grabbing loose clothing or straps. Pull their head back and punch them in the throat.

/offtopic

[Eldariel]

I was wrong; doesn't say anything about polymorph. Here's the text from the srd:


Note the bolded bit.

PHB says nothing on the subject since the present wording is nothing like the PHB wordings; there's been about 2056 different errata applied to Polymorph-line, Alternate Form and all the derivatives (including Wildshape; the present WS is an AF derivative).

As such, what PHB says has absolutely 0 effect on how the effects actually work. SRD (well, PHB/MM errata to be precise), Rules Compendium and IIRC PHBII (which has the Polymorph Subschool) cover the present rules on the subject.

[Fiery Diamond]

Not this again. It was obviously an oversight; they put unarmed strikes on the table in the simple weapons category because they didn't feel like creating a fourth weapon category solely for unarmed strikes.

[Idlewyld]

Just because it states they can attack with their fists doesn't mean they're proficient.

Anyone can attack with any weapon. You don't need to be proficient to do so.

Yes we are aware Monks should be proficient with their unarmed strike, and no one would make them eat the -4 penalty. It's just funny to discuss the obviously ridiculous notion that, due to how the rules work, monks are not proficient with their main class feature.

Okay? Okay!

Once again, tables are not RAW. Heck, look up the PHB definition of unarmed attack and unarmed strike. Both refer to it being an attack with NO weapon, so how can NO weapon be a simple weapon? It's like Fiery Diamond said, they just had to put the damage somewhere, so...

[Frosty]

It may not be a weapon but it has proficiency. Or else even Wizards will be proficient with their unarmed strikes.

[Petrocorus]

For the more creatively minded, MotAO gives you access to pretty much anything for added versatility.

What is MotAO?



I am not being silly, and I will not be using Bubs, or anything similar. It will be a commoner and his feats/gear/skills/whatever, against the monk with same. The Monk could even take Leadership, I couldn't care less. The Commoner will stand alone.


And I bet Commoner would probably win.

I want to see this built.

Does somebody knows were i can find the tier classification of the classes?

[Frosty]

Mage of the Arcane Order. It's from Complete Mage I think.

JaronK's sig probably has the link since he wrote the tier system/

[Emmerask]

I am not being silly, and I will not be using Bubs, or anything similar. It will be a commoner and his feats/gear/skills/whatever, against the monk with same. The Monk could even take Leadership, I couldn't care less. The Commoner will stand alone.


And I bet Commoner would probably win.

Commoner doesn´t get any feats though (aside from human first level one if you use a human) + d4 hd, low bab and low saves all you won´t stand a chance against anything ^^ you are proficient with one simple weapon though ^^

[Claudius Maximus]

Mage of the Arcane Order is from Complete Arcane.

[Lycanthromancer]

Commoner doesn´t get any feats though (aside from human first level one if you use a human) + d4 hd, low bab and low saves all you won´t stand a chance against anything ^^ you are proficient with one simple weapon though ^^I can actually think of at least one way, but Giacomo won't like it.

[Emmerask]

My bad they do get feats every three levels...
You may continue this madness :smallwink:

does the way include umd and some form of wish?

Anyway I still don´t see it coming because everything you can do with the commoner you can also do with the monk with the exception that monk is more solid then commoner in regards to his stats ^^

[sambo.]

without reading the whole thread, Monks are hamstrung in two major ways.

1: MAD or Multi-Ability-Dependence. Monks need high scores for a bunch of stats. Str, Dex, Con and Wis most notably.

2: Partial BAB for a melee type.

fix those and you've got a pretty decent character class.

[Emmerask]

If you don´t plan on using power attack(without shocktrooper) medium bab is not an issue :smallwink:

[DragoonWraith]

without reading the whole thread, Monks are hamstrung in two major ways.

1: MAD or Multi-Ability-Dependence. Monks need high scores for a bunch of stats. Str, Dex, Con and Wis most notably.

2: Partial BAB for a melee type.

fix those and you've got a pretty decent character class.
You missed the lack of meaningful abilities past level 2, the lack of synergy between the meaningful abilities that they do have, and the d8 hit dice.

[Claudius Maximus]

Anyway I still don´t see it coming because everything you can do with the commoner you can also do with the monk with the exception that monk is more solid then commoner in regards to his stats ^^

I have to agree with this. Killing a monk with a commoner proves nothing anyway, except that whatever item, feat, or skill shenaniganry you use is broken. In most cases, the monk can do these things just as well.

[Gametime]

You missed the lack of meaningful abilities past level 2, the lack of synergy between the meaningful abilities that they do have, and the d8 hit dice.

There isn't a single class in the PHB that has synergy between abilities, though, to be fair. The classes that are strong are strong because their features are ridiculous, not because they work together really well.

(Unless you count spells as synergizing with everything, because they can kill/buff/do anything...but that's stretching the term.)

[Petrocorus]

Ahem, Battletitans aren't dire turtles. They are a good deal faster. And don't forget his cohort.

BTW, at what level can you have a battletitan as animal companion?


For coming back to the monk. What do you thing about dipping 2 level of Monk for a spellcaster?

[Idlewyld]

It may not be a weapon but it has proficiency. Or else even Wizards will be proficient with their unarmed strikes.

If a wizard takes Improved Unarmed Strike, is he not then proficient?

[Yuki Akuma]

No, because Improved Unarmed Strike says nothing about granting proficiency, and it doesn't require proficiency either. :smallwink:

Although you should totally houserule that Improved Unarmed Strike also functions as Simple Weapon Proficiency: Unarmed Strike.

[DragoonWraith]

There isn't a single class in the PHB that has synergy between abilities, though, to be fair. The classes that are strong are strong because their features are ridiculous, not because they work together really well.
I disagree.

Barbarian - Rage is designed to have him run in, heedless of the consequences. DR lets him do that more safely. Uncanny Dodge lets him always be ready - heightening his agressiveness. Trap Sense is weird, but whatever.

Bard - Fascinate + Suggestion? Plus all of their buffing songs. I think it counts.

Druid - Animal companion gives an obvious target for the large number of Druid spells that affect animals. Wild Shape lets a lot of those same spells affect himself.

Paladin - Smite Evil, conveniently paired with at-will Detect Evil - look at that!

Ranger - Track, with Woodland Stride? Very synergistic, albeit somewhat weak.

Rogue - full of stuffs. Trapfinding and Trap Sense, Sneak Attack plus heavy sneak skills plus dexterity focus, and the Special Abilities allow customization and synergize well - crippling strike with Sneak Attack, Skill Mastery with his skillmonkey role, Defensive Roll goes well with Evasion, as does Improved Evasion (gee!), etc.

Seriously, the only ones left out are the class-feature-less ones (Cleric, Fighter, Sorcerer, Wizard), and the Monk.

[Lycanthromancer]

I have to agree with this. Killing a monk with a commoner proves nothing anyway, except that whatever item, feat, or skill shenaniganry you use is broken. In most cases, the monk can do these things just as well.Can't attack people with an infinite army of chickens, I bet. No Handle Animal.

*Sniff* It's beautiful, man. Poultry in motion.

[PlzBreakMyCmpAn]

Yes in a Tier 2-3 group. Straight monk in level 17 party. Why? Because I CoDzilla'd on the DM and felt bad about it. I tried to nerf myself with a goody-goody (in a true-to-the-fluff sort of optimal way). I'll give you a hint: I was naked. Anyone want to guess my HP,AC,SR?

I've never used slowfall, but I have had my monk disco-dance with several illusory copies during a BBEG's evil speech. I took the 'any bodypart' of flurry literally. After the player's say how I attacked they refused to enlarge (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/EnlargePerson.htm)me. :smallwink:


I only play monks now, because if I play any other class I will accidentally dramatically outpower the rest of the D&D group I play in.I feel ya

[Knaight]

There isn't a single class in the PHB that has synergy between abilities, though, to be fair. The classes that are strong are strong because their features are ridiculous, not because they work together really well.

(Unless you count spells as synergizing with everything, because they can kill/buff/do anything...but that's stretching the term.)

Yes, some do. Lets look at the paladin. They have detect evil and smite evil, so they don't waste smite. Furthermore, they have heavy armor proficiency, lance proficiency, and a badass mount, making them really good mounted uberchargers, with a mount that will survive, and recoups the heavy armor. Aura of courage applies to the mount, so it won't run, and synergizes with immunity to fear. Furthermore, Smite Evil is useful as a killing measure with 1 powerful attack, and they are uberchargers. Although it is just peanuts. Plus they have healing nearby, so they can keep the mount healthy, and with charisma useful Divine Grace synergizes with everything.

[Idlewyld]

So what is the point of Improved Unarmed Strike? Other than negating the AoO?

[Sinfire Titan]

Can't attack people with an infinite army of chickens, I bet. No Handle Animal.

*Sniff* It's beautiful, man. Poultry in motion.

Careful there, don't offend the Cuccos with your puns.

[Frosty]

So what is the point of Improved Unarmed Strike? Other than negating the AoO?

That is the only point of the feat, yes.

[Kantolin]

You'd need a seriously optimized game, without the monk doing some optimization, to have the monk be literally 'dead weight' and need rescuing.

Or, I suppose. If the party consists of rocket tag tier 1 characters, and you have anyone who isn't optimized to rocket tag levels (Even, say, an unoptimized fireball slinging wizard)... then you're still probably not dead weight. You're better than a bunch of things, just hardly up to snuff. Monks are also decent at not-dying, especially as optimization increases and you start to look at things like touch AC and saves governing everything more than hit points and normal AC, so the 'dying repeatedly to save/resurrect you' doesn't take.

When you're up against an ubercharger or rocket tag wizard who won initiative, the ability to have another person to get hit for a thousand is valuable no matter who it is, and a monk is nigh-guaranteed to be more useful than a level 1 hireling. Plus, it's not like you have limited party slots or something.

Now, if the worry is about splitting gold... then that becomes a little more understandable. Of course, then Czilla starts arguing kill counts with Dzilla, and the battle where the Artificer won initiative and won the battle makes everyone mad at her, and the Wizard is arguing that he made all the enemies useless while the Erudite is arguing that she's the one who actually killed all the enemies...

(And the bard has, some time ago, diplomacy'd himself all the gold anyway)

[ericgrau]

:smalleek:

See, I'm really, really fine with 3.5. And no, I never had balance issue or similar things I read on these boards.

But..but.. overpowered monks..

Haha, I feel the same way; don't really have issues with them one way or the other. But I'm always reminded of it whenever I read about monks on these boards.

[Yuki Akuma]

That is the only point of the feat, yes.

It also lets you deal lethal damage without a -4 penalty.

[ericgrau]

So i was thinking while working on a monk fix about how a monks unarmed attack counts as a natural weapon. I was thinking about this due to the argument made against monks not being proficient with there unarmed strikes. Aren't all characters always considered proficient with there natural weapons?

I'm afraid nothing ever says humanoidss are proficient with their natural weapons either. :smallbiggrin:

[Idlewyld]

That is the only point of the feat, yes.

Wow, the things you learn after ten years of doing it wrong according RAW, or not written as may be the case. Oh well, I house ruled in Common Sense a long long time ago for just such things.

[Gametime]

I disagree with your disagreement.


I
Barbarian - Rage is designed to have him run in, heedless of the consequences. DR lets him do that more safely. Uncanny Dodge lets him always be ready - heightening his agressiveness. Trap Sense is weird, but whatever.

DR does hardly anything to reduce incoming damage. Uncanny Dodge does nothing to increase his aggression. They synergize flavorfully, sure. So do the monk's abilities. Mechanically? Rage itself is great, and so is Uncanny Dodge, but they hardly complement each other.



Bard - Fascinate + Suggestion? Plus all of their buffing songs. I think it counts.

Their songs can't, barring significant splatbook access, be used simultaneously. Also, requiring someone to use two abilities together is not the same thing as those abilities working especially well together.

Again, bards have good class features, but every one of them is good on it's own - not because of the other class features. (The fact that bards are worth taking several levels in for Inspire Courage ALONE, and no other bardic music abilities, should highlight this.)



Druid - Animal companion gives an obvious target for the large number of Druid spells that affect animals. Wild Shape lets a lot of those same spells affect himself.

Druids, I'll give you. Generally, I wouldn't count spells, but a lot of the best druid spells would be really situational - I mean, c'mon, buffing animals? - were it not for the companion. Share Spell is also really good here, far better than with a familiar, because the druid likes being in melee with his companion thanks to another class feature - Wild Shape.



Paladin - Smite Evil, conveniently paired with at-will Detect Evil - look at that!

That's a stretch, at best. Paladins already aren't allowed to go nutso on people without a good reason; Detect Evil is more a formality than anything else. Most paladins wouldn't bother to waste the standard action on making sure that the baby-eating orc berserker is EEEEEEVIL anyway.

But sure, it's at least a little synergistic.



Ranger - Track, with Woodland Stride? Very synergistic, albeit somewhat weak.

Again, sure, but since the complaint was that the monk's worthwhile class features don't synergize, it does little to note that the ranger's worthless class features do.

Perhaps I should have specified meaningful synergy. My mistake.



Rogue - full of stuffs. Trapfinding and Trap Sense, Sneak Attack plus heavy sneak skills plus dexterity focus, and the Special Abilities allow customization and synergize well - crippling strike with Sneak Attack, Skill Mastery with his skillmonkey role, Defensive Roll goes well with Evasion, as does Improved Evasion (gee!), etc.

I'm gonna call nonsense on this one. Sneak Attack is best used via flanking or magic, not hiding, since the latter only gives you one good shot. Their dexterity focus is because of their stealthy skills - you can't use the fact that they need high dexterity to sneak well to prove that they sneak well. (They don't have a lot of required scores, which is a good thing, but that has less to do with existing abilities synergizing and more to do with a lack of abilities that would put extra strain on the rogue, like the ones the monk is saddled with.

Again, abilities that require other abilities to work at all is not synergy. It is the condition of possibility for the ability to exist. Improved Evasion does not synergize with evasion - it replaces it. Crippling Strike does not synergize with sneak attack - it requires it. For synergy to exist, the abilities have to work together - usable alone, better in conjunction.

Defensive Roll doesn't synergize with evasion. They're exclusive; if you evaded, you don't need to roll. They're both good to have, but that's because you want lots of backup plans, not because they make each other better.

Trap Sense and trapfinding aren't really synergistic either - if you find and disarm the trap, you don't need trap sense. If you get hit by the trap, you didn't need trapfinding. Again, they're both good to have just in case, but one does not make the other better.



Seriously, the only ones left out are the class-feature-less ones (Cleric, Fighter, Sorcerer, Wizard), and the Monk.

I've been convinced only of the druid, and somewhat of the paladin and ranger (since only their weakest abilities synergize). The others are unconvincing. The Fighter makes a better case, honestly, since tons and tons o' feats gives you a lot of wiggle room with prereqs. (Not that I'd say that really counts, but it's something to consider.)

Honestly, the monk is a really weak class, but saying that it's because of a lack of synergy is just wrong. The example that's always cited is flurry/fast movement. That's entirely wrong. Flurry and fast movement DO synergize - both are legitimately useful abilities that work better in conjunction because one allows the other to be used more often. Unless you plan to start every fight adjacent to enemies or losing initiative, fast movement will at least sometimes allow you to close in one turn when a fighter would have to take two (and thus lose out on at least one attack).

THAT is synergy. One ability enables the other. Is it enough to make the monk good? Goodness, no! But "synergy" doesn't mean "using both abilities every turn."

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: Three threads on the same topic (monks) have been consolidated. Such a process is admittedly a bit messy, but it wouldn't be if people would just use existing threads rather than start new ones. Are monks as bad as they say? Does anyone play monks unaltered? Are monks even proficient with their own parts? These are all about the same thing.

[Demons_eye]

No, but if you can't hold your weight, there's not IC-reason for the group to keep you around. A liability is a liability.

I can see the opposite for the monk. Why do these people die a lot? Can't they stay alive for more then a few minutes? If he dies mid combat then HE is the liability not I.

[Gametime]

Yes, some do. Lets look at the paladin. They have detect evil and smite evil, so they don't waste smite.

Already addressed this one. It's really weak synergy, at best.


Furthermore, they have heavy armor proficiency, lance proficiency, and a badass mount, making them really good mounted uberchargers, with a mount that will survive, and recoups the heavy armor.

Heavy armor gives a penalty to ride checks. That's non-synergy. Further, as I said above, having one ability REQUIRE another is not synergy. If you don't have ride, you don't have a mount - you have a horse. Giving paladins both is really just giving them one thing, because without the other it's useless.


Aura of courage applies to the mount, so it won't run, and synergizes with immunity to fear.

No, it doesn't. Aura of Courage is non-stacking with immunity to fear. They're both good, but they don't synergize; the one that only affects the paladin obsoletes the other one for the paladin. Further, saying that aura of courage applying to allies is synergy is disingenuous; that's all the ability does. It isn't made BETTER by the mount's presence. The mount is made better by it's presence, but that's sort of what buffs do. To count as synergy, it would have to create some additional benefit tangential to the one it gives by default - for example, a bonus to hit providing a greater than normal boost to a power attacker because it can be converted directly to damage.


Furthermore, Smite Evil is useful as a killing measure with 1 powerful attack, and they are uberchargers. Although it is just peanuts. Plus they have healing nearby, so they can keep the mount healthy, and with charisma useful Divine Grace synergizes with everything.

I'm not sure I'd count ability scores being good for more than one thing as synergy, but sure. It's close enough. Mind, it's only good for ONE other thing, and Divine Grace is the MAIN reason, not the other way around, so...yeah, that's not really synergy at all. Now, STRENGTH adding to your saving throws totally would be.

Smite does work very well with charging, I'll give you that. That has much more to do with a feat and the lance than it does with the paladin, though; the mount alone isn't what makes charging good, it's just convenient. Since feats and weapons aren't class features, I'm not really seeing this as proof of how well their class features synergize. It's more like showing how different class features work well with other, separate things that they can pick up.

[tyckspoon]

Honestly, the monk is a really weak class, but saying that it's because of a lack of synergy is just wrong. The example that's always cited is flurry/fast movement. That's entirely wrong. Flurry and fast movement DO synergize - both are legitimately useful abilities that work better in conjunction because one allows the other to be used more often. Unless you plan to start every fight adjacent to enemies or losing initiative, fast movement will at least sometimes allow you to close in one turn when a fighter would have to take two (and thus lose out on at least one attack).

THAT is synergy. One ability enables the other. Is it enough to make the monk good? Goodness, no! But "synergy" doesn't mean "using both abilities every turn."

Hard to call this a particular benefit of the Monk, anyway- every melee character would achieve the same 'synergy' from a speed boost, and all of them can acquire it pretty easily given that it's an enhancement bonus. 1 level of Barbarian grants a superior speed boost, because it will stack with other things. Boots of Striding and Springing give + 10 enhancement. Haste gives +30 (and, coincidentally, is easily affordable at the same level range where the Monk gets +30 as a class feature. A class feature that he is probably going to override with his own Haste effect.) Some form of Flight will usually give a base of 40-60 that ignores ground-based restrictions, depending on the load carried/armor worn, which is then increased by Haste. The Monk may achieve a higher speed if he sticks to the class, but you have to get into some pretty edge cases to find places where a 90-120 foot move is all that much better than a 70-90 move; both characters can cover the distance of a single bow range increment or a Short range spell in one turn, and both will reach a Medium range spell in 2 turns given normal movement.

[Gametime]

Hard to call this a particular benefit of the Monk, anyway- every melee character would achieve the same 'synergy' from a speed boost, and all of them can acquire it pretty easily given that it's an enhancement bonus. 1 level of Barbarian grants a superior speed boost, because it will stack with other things. Boots of Striding and Springing give + 10 enhancement. Haste gives +30 (and, coincidentally, is easily affordable at the same level range where the Monk gets +30 as a class feature. A class feature that he is probably going to override with his own Haste effect.) Some form of Flight will usually give a base of 40-60 that ignores ground-based restrictions, depending on the load carried/armor worn, which is then increased by Haste. The Monk may achieve a higher speed if he sticks to the class, but you have to get into some pretty edge cases to find places where a 90-120 foot move is all that much better than a 70-90 move; both characters can cover the distance of a single bow range increment or a Short range spell in one turn, and both will reach a Medium range spell in 2 turns given normal movement.

All true. Nonetheless, without considering any other items, spells, or feats, the monk's fast movement synergizes with an ability that rewards full attacks. Not particularly well, and not enough to make up for a host of other problems, but it just goes to show that synergy is only as good as the abilities in question.

[Greenish]

For coming back to the monk. What do you thing about dipping 2 level of Monk for a spellcaster?If you really, really have to get Evasion… dip rogue. More skillpoints, more skills and sneak attack might help you to qualify for something.

I can't think of any other reason you'd consider a monk tip, so you'll have to clarify what you wish to accomplish with your caster, so we can tell you it ain't worth it.

[Tinydwarfman]

BTW, at what level can you have a battletitan as animal companion?


For coming back to the monk. What do you thing about dipping 2 level of Monk for a spellcaster?

I luuuuurve me a monk 1(or 2)/druid 19

[Apropos]

Monk dip is definitely not useful for arcane casters. But for a druid/cleric its nice early on.

[Petrocorus]

If you really, really have to get Evasion… dip rogue. More skillpoints, more skills and sneak attack might help you to qualify for something.

I can't think of any other reason you'd consider a monk tip, so you'll have to clarify what you wish to accomplish with your caster, so we can tell you it ain't worth it.

I was not thinking to a particular build. I just thought that the very good saves+ Evasion could be a good dip for a spellcaster. Possible combat reflexes also in case of emergency at low lvl.
But, i'm all new at DnD.

[Greenish]

I was not thinking to a particular build. I just thought that the very good saves+ Evasion could be a good dip for a spellcaster. Possible combat reflexes also in case of emergency at low lvl.
But, i'm all new at DnD.Spells are really, really good. You most likely don't want to delay spellcasting without a very good reason, and improving two of your saves (or one of them for divine casters) is not worth it in most cases.


Does somebody knows were i can find the tier classification of the classes?If this has been answered yet, I didn't notice, so:
Tier system. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0)
Why each class is in it's tier. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5256.0)
And then JaronK's explanation on what the tiers mean (long read):
A big question that's come up recently is this: what exactly is the purpose of the tiers, and what do they measure? Many people think it means raw power, but that's not the case. Raw power is pretty worthless as a measurement, as there are too many areas to be powerful in. What's stronger after all... the Barbarian that can do 2000 damage a hit, or the Factotum who can be completely impossible to detect? In the end, the best explanation I can give is a metaphor.

Imagine for the moment a map. This map represents the entire campaign world as the DM knows it. The map is four dimensional in that it includes time... it includes the invasion of the Mindflayers 10,000 years before the start of the game, the Orc invasion that's coming a year after the game starts, the fact that the princess of the land will be kidnapped right after the game starts, and so on. This map also includes any notable NPCs, any locations... basically everything the DM knows about (and thus everything that exists in the game world). Some DMs make their entire map before the players even sit down the first time, while others build it piecemeal as the game progresses. Some build a huge map, most of which the players will never see, others build a map that's just big enough to include everything the players will see. But this map exists for all games in some form.

Through this map runs a road. This road represents the path the DM expects the PCs to take through the game world. It too is four dimensional. Perhaps the PCs are expected to be chased out of their starting village by some attacking monsters, then lured to the castle with promises of reward for rescuing the princess, or whatever. In some cases, this road may represent the story the DM wants to tell via the PCs, in other cases the road connects from one encounter to the next. For some DMs, this road will be very thin, and the PCs are expected to follow a very specific set of actions... this is generally called railroading. For other DMs, this road is very wide, such that the PCs can wander all over without ever leaving the expected road... this is called sandbox play. And as with the map, some DMs plan out the road far in advance, while other DMs only plan it out session by session, but in any case there's always some kind of road.

So let's imagine an example, using what we've got above. We've got our campaign world of, let's say, Jaronland. As the DM, I've planned out the continent full of city states, with each city state being controlled by one race and some races controlling multiple such city states. It's a somewhat low magic world... WBL is normal but it's hard to get specific magic items. I'm a pretty sandboxy DM, so the road is pretty wide, but it starts with the PCs getting chased out of their home and sent to a castle where they learn that there is a healthy reward for whoever can rescue the princess, and rescuing the princess will result in the PCs learning of an upcoming orc invasion which they must then prepare for. Eventually they'll gain power and treasure by clearing out some dungeons and solving tasks for allies and amass an army and repel the invasion (okay, so I just finished playing Dragon Age). In this case, the road is that series of events... it's reasonably wide, so as long as the PCs are chasing those goals running around clearing out enemies and making friends they're basically on the road.

Now, what do the Tiers represent? Weaker tier classes will require help to follow my road if I don't specifically build the road to play to their strengths. A Fighter, for example, might be completely worthless when the PCs have to travel over to deal with the elves and convince them to help, as diplomacy is required and the Fighter has absolutely no diplomatic abilities. When dealing with the evil necromancer in his tower, the Ninja can't do anything since all the enemies are undead unless I make sure to include special gear for him. At the very weakest tiers even playing to their strengths won't help... a Warrior will have trouble being useful even in standard combat encounters unless he's heavily optimized. As a DM, I'm going to have to work to make sure my weak tier players can follow my road, by tailoring encounters for them (suddenly, some elves are ambushed by monsters! By defeating the monsters, you make the elves like you more! Good job Fighter!), by giving them loot and gear that fixes their class problems (when you unlock the chest, you find a Truedeath Crystal. Yay ninja, now you can do something useful!), or by otherwise giving them little nudges that help them out (You find a magical warrior only +1 Keen Enfeebling Rapier that's mysteriously Warrior only!).

At the other end of the spectrum are the powerful tier classes. These guys can follow the road easily, but they can also leave it entirely. My campaign as listed would be pretty lame if the Cleric just says "I cast Miracle. There, we win the battle against the Orcs. What's next?" Likewise, having the Wizard assassinate the Orc leader with Love's Pain would be pretty silly. And if the players say "we need to get stronger before the invasion... let's Plane Shift to Ysgard!" things are going to get very weird, as they've gone not just off my road, but right off my map. Suddenly instead of having to help my players along the road, I now have to put barriers on the side of the road to keep them in. This can be nerfs (a mysterious force prevents Plane Shift from working!), coincidences that keep them from using their nastiest tricks (nobody ever loved the Orc leader. Also, he has an antimagic torq that's always on. Stop that), or gentleman's agreements with the players (um, please don't cast miracle in the final battle. It'll mess up my plans. Thanks).

At this point I should mention that I don't consider players to be asses for breaking my game. It's not their fault... really. The rules of the game give them these abilities, and I gave them this scenario, and it makes perfect sense for their characters to do what works in saving their homeland. After all, can you really imagine a Wizard saying "hey, there's the killer dragon that's going to eat us all. I could totally kill it with Shivering Touch and then go home safe and sound with all my friends safe too, but instead I'm just going to cast Haste on the Fighter so he feels better and the fight is more interesting"? That would be like a soldier in battle saying "well, our enemies aren't as well equipped as us, so I'm going to get out of my tank and try and attack them with a sword!" His CO would punch him in the face and get him back in that unfair tank of his right away (or use some other appropriate military discipline). Point being, it's not that my players are asses for doing exactly what they're allowed to do. The problem is the class, not the player (unless the player is being particularly abusive after being asked otherwise, or intentionally messing up the game. But I don't attribute to malice what can be attributed to ignorance). Sure, you can just ask the player not to use the abilities that get the job done really well, but that gets annoying as you quickly run into the situation where the player is saying "okay, I can beat this encounter in the following ways. Which ones are allowed today?" And that's just not a challenging dramatic way to win battles at all.

Anyway, in the center of the Tiers you've got the classes that can follow most roads quite nicely, and yet don't easily go flying right off said roads. These are the Tier 3 and 4 classes. Sometimes they can't follow the road perfectly, sometimes they may be able to leave it, but in general they stay on that road.

And of course you can make particularly easy roads to follow, or hard roads to follow. This works great if everyone's at a similar power level. I'm running a game right now where everyone's a level 6 commoner. I just make the road easy to follow... they most recently had to defeat a group of awakened house cats (the epic battle continues!). In a normal game they'd be screwed, but the difficulty level was set low enough that they could do it (though one of them got sucker punched by a stunning fist to the nuts from a kitten... for one damage. Go Monk Kitty!).

So, one can then catagorize the tiers like this, if one wants:

Tier 6: Can only follow very easy roads. Is virtually incapable of surprising the DM or leaving the road. Will need help to keep up.

Tier 5: Will often have trouble following roads where their specialties don't apply. Will almost never leave the road, though might rarely do something unexpected.

Tier 4: Will occasionally have trouble following roads in certain circumstances. Will very rarely leave the road, but may do unexpected things occasionally.

Tier 3: Will only rarely have trouble following the DM's road. Sometimes will have unexpected abilities that allow them to leave the road.

Tier 2: Will occasionally have trouble following roads in certain circumstances. Will often have abilities that allow them to leave the road, and thus require significant observation to avoid having them go in an unexpected direction.

Tier 1: Will virtually always be able to follow any road not specifically tailored to be difficult for them. Has abilities that allow them to be very unpredictable and can leave even the widest of roads if played with any amount of creativity. Requires significant observation to avoid having them go in a completely unexpected direction.

Note there's a funny thing that happens with the Tier 2 classes, as they're as powerful as Tier 1s (and thus as able to leave the road) and yet they're not as flexible as Tier 3s most of the time. They're just sort of special that way. In a weird way, they're some of the most difficult classes to deal with, as they sometimes need help, and sometimes need restraining. For example, a Sorcerer might be able to Planar Bind something with incredible power to help deal with one situation, and may thus dramatically change your game world (for example by binding a Midguard Dwarf and thus becoming able to get whatever magic items they might want in the example game above), and yet be unable to do something like talk with people and gather information in a town.

Anyway, I hope that all makes sense.

JaronK

[PhoenixRivers]

Let me just get this straight.

You're arguing this because you belive that it's more worth it to spend said money on a permanent physical representation of said money.

While giacomo believes that it doesn't matter if the object is permanent or not, as long as it, in theory, gets him atleast 1 use per encounter up to L20?

In 20 levels, a character should have (at equal CR) 280 encounters.

To match that, and get 1 charge per encounter, you'd need... 6 wands.

126000 gp. That's... 16% of your WBL to achieve what you described. To put it in context, for the same price, any full-BAB character can get a +5 str tome, and walk around with that just about that same buff all the time.

Even better, they can get a +6 Str item, and come out 5 str ahead.

And it won't require an action in combat, either.

This is the precise reason that monks have issues. If you need to use a wand of divine power every combat to be viable to full BAB classes... You're not viable with them. You're spending action 1 to buff. The full BAB spends that time functioning in combat.

[El Dorado]

I just realized that a monk's slow fall is better than feather fall in one remarkable way: it is an extraordinary ability. Take That antimagic field pit trap!

[Greenish]

I just realized that a monk's slow fall is better than feather fall in one remarkable way: it is an extraordinary ability. Take That antimagic field pit trap!What if the walls are too far? :smallcool:

[Superglucose]

What if the walls are too far? :smallcool:
Well then they're both screwed, except the monk comes out ahead because he has d8 hitdice!

See? Monks ARE good!

[Greenish]

Well then they're both screwed, except the monk comes out ahead because he has d8 hitdice!

See? Monks ARE good!I have been enlightened!
http://caravanofdreams.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/buddha-enlightenment1.jpg

[Tyndmyr]

I consider that though, and in all circumstances, a subtraction of AC will increase the value of the fighter or barb by contrast to the monk. Likewise with increases to AC, you still find the disparity favours the non-monk. The best range for monks is when the fighter or barb can't quite benefit from power attacking, but does hit automatically on the first hit.

I believe the assumption is that the fighter/barb does not have or use power attack/shock trooper. Why this assumption is made, I don't know. I mean, if you're going to assume the monk has trawled for every feat available, you should at least assume the most typical damage combo for the competitor.

[Tyndmyr]

Hmm. Tyndmyr first...



Here is the link to the joker monk build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704) I once did.

Gotcha. Yeah, it does spend a very significant amount of WBL on consumables. Lets look at your level 6 wand purchases, shall we?

3x Enlarge (5 charges each, total 1,125)
2x Heroism (bard version, 1 charge each, total 1,200)
2x Silence (1 charge each, total 900)
2x Hide from Animals (2 charges each, total 300)
2x Obscuring Mist (2 charges each, total 300)
2x Detect Secret Doors (1 charge each, total 150)
2x Detect Magic (1 charge each, total 75)
2x Comprehend Languages (1 charge each, total 150)
2x Cure Light Wounds (2 charges each, total 300)
2x Resist Energy (Ranger version, 1 charge each, 300)

First off, it's very obvious that you're using a very, very lenient version of partially charged wands, in which every wand is available in the desired number of charges, from the desired crafter. Even MiC only lists them in charge quantities as low as ten. Traditionally, single charge magical items are scrolls/potions, not wands. It's also very clear that if you actually use these things in a fight, you'll run dry in a heartbeat.


Again: trip attacks are touch attacks. The only thing that matters are the opposed STR check mods.
And it is not easier for fighters to pick up this feat, but it costs them INT 13 (15 when going for the STR-boosting races in core) and another feat.
The fighter's advantage, though, is to get the improved trip faster when they so wish.
And a fighter has to spend a lot of feats to emulate all the abilities the monk has (and actually some he can never emulate with feats at all).

The fighter has a lot of feats. More importantly, some of the monk abilities he doesn't need to replicate at all. PA +ST is more powerful than all the monk abilities put together.

Since we're discussing level 6 already(and your build had a spiked chain involved earlier than this), lets consider the comparative tripping of equal strength monk and fighter. We'll assume 18 for each. The fighter is one who uses a spiked chain as his normal weapon.

Monk: 4(str) -4(non proficiency) +1(masterwork) +4(BaB): +5 attack vs touch

Fighter: 4(str) +1(Mw or +1) +6 BaB +1(Weapon Focus) +12 attack vs touch

Amusingly enough, the fighter gets the iterative and the monk does not. No, the monk is not better at this. If the monk opts to flurry to match the iterative, he is now at a +4 attack on both swings. Yeah, no.


As shown, hitting plays a minor role in tripping - at least the part where BAB is relevant for touch attacks. Actually, since many opponents also use concealment, a monk with his higher no. of attacks has more chances to trip per round and is ahead here as well.

Dude, when you have a whopping +5 to hit, you can still miss touch attacks. Against anyone with significant dex, you're probably just wasting your turn.

A monk has a higher number of attacks with his fists, yes. With a spiked chain, as you proposed, no. He only gets two iteratives in non-epic. The fighter is one ahead here. Sure, you can flurry. You then have quantity, but a lack of quality. Until 9th level, this also means taking an attack penalty.

And don't compare tripping via unarmed to tripping with reach. Reach is pure awesome.


And the MAD myth gets repeated again and again - in spite of all the evidence already piled up ... the monk can focus completely on STR without any problem.

You didn't actually cite any evidence. You just repeated the statement.

Fact: A fighter can have two points less in con than a monk and have the same hp.

Fact: The monk only gets two feats ignoring prereqs, from a very short list. If he wants anything else that the fighter needs int/dex 13 for, he also needs int/dex 13.

Fact: A monk doesn't generally wear armor, and relies on wis for AC. If both a fighter and a monk dump wisdom, the monk will be forever behind on AC.

Fact: Quivering Palm DC goes off wisdom. It's low even with an excellent wisdom. If you dump it, your targets will generally only fail on a 1.

Fact: Stunning fist has the exact same DC as Quivering Palm(10+.5 level + wis mod). If you've dumped wisdom, you've also made this ability meaningless.

What you have left is a monk without useful class features.


Funniest opinion so far in this thread I guess.
Player: "Hey, why can't my fighter have a greatsword?"
DM: "I do not have any fighter miniature with a greatsword. You have to be the axe-wielder here. And since it is an orc, that's your race btw."

You completely ignored the point. Battles typically take place such that additional movement is meaningless unless you need to run away.


It is, actually. Which is why the advantage to wear armour is getting less and less important at higher levels.

It is...but it's still an advantage. And you're just trying to spin the topic away from the original curious idea that mage armor was better for a monk than a fighter.


Er...stunning fist? Spot/listen/sense motive skills?

You're dumping stats to focus on strength, remember? Or are we dealing with Shrodinger's monk here?


Now whole-heartedly agree. Again, a fighter has different strengths and weaknesses than a monk.

Strengths, yes.


It is small wonder that you think the monk class is weak when you leave most of its class abilities out of the equation.

When someone says "they get abilities like x and y", that does not imply that they are a complete list. You are again dodging actually proving the value of those abilities.


No, it is pointing out the strengths of buff synergy with monk class abilities that you get with buffs that you can get with UMD. I do not think there is anything to misunderstand here.

UMD is not a monk class feature. Cha is not a monk stat. Monks have NO special advantage here, and all classes synergize with magical buffs. This is like stating that a monk with giant piles of money is great.

Yes, he is, but another class with the same pile of money is still better.


But spiked chain tactics do not always beat grappling tactics. Sometimes grappling tactics are better, sometimes spiked chain is better. The game is too varied to say which is superior in most campaigns.
When including stand still you go non-core and a whole variety of additional grappling options and boosts are available (like, for instance, boosts to unarmed damage).

You ignored the fact that Stand Still means that you don't get to grapple. Or, with a decent amount of reach, escape. Unless he misses you on the AoO(Unlikely, since he actually has a great attack modifier, and you have a lack of armor), you stand there. On his turn, he full attacks you, and you then die horribly.


No, they are also just great in 1:1 combat.

Grapple builds are a poor choice for going solo because far, far too many things can either avoid grapples with ease or will trump your ability to grapple. Leaving aside the fact that you can't build a monk who is a good tripper, a good grappler, AND dump dex and int, as you imply....lets look at mobs.

Polar Bear: CR4, Improved Grab. +18 Grapple.

Yeah, grappling him is a terrible idea.


But I compare the highest level of damage dice the monk will ever get with the highest damage dice the fighter gets in core.
6d8 beats 3d6. Rock hard fact. No way around that.

In core? What is this in core business? This isn't a core only discussion. You've changed the comparison to be as optimal for you as possible, and ignored everything else.

For example, the fact that damage die makes up only a small portion of damage. Strength and power attacking matter a ton.


Since a lot of fighter damage depends on lowering to hit for Power attack bonuses, I am not sure whether a monk will hit less often than a fighter.
Also, lvl 20 monk BAB: 15/15/15/10/5, for a total of 60 vs
lvl 20 fighter BAB: 20/15/10/5 for a total of 50.
Doesn't this tell you something?

Yes, that power attacking goes with shock trooper.


Well, I would not exactly dare to comment on class balance in epic areas.

As I stated, the lack of epic progression, due to the use of monks belt, impacts monks starting at level 16. It's somewhat amazing that you could quote this, and still miss that it's not just an epic issue.


As I showed above with the level 5 and 10 monks vs CR 5 and CR 10 encounters in core.

The


Two comments:
- a 1st level spell from wand costs 15gp per use. That is not a fortune for mid-levels&up
- dispels from monster opponents and even npcs are quite rare since rarely this is the best strategy available to them in combat.

A single 1st level spell off a wand is unlikely to do much from mid-levels up. Yay, you have mage armor for the fight. You wasted the first round(or are burning charges every hour), and still have less AC than the fighter. You need to burn far more than this to have a significant effect.

Dispels from mid levels up are a standard caster tactic, and an untargetted dispel is often the best tactic available. Unless your DM is giving you an easy/stupid opponent, dispels should come up at some point. Not every fight, no, but often enough to be a factor. This is especially true if it's obvious that you're buffing yourself.


It is overall superior, of course, but
- it may have more limit in a single day and

If the amount of casting a wizard + scrolls on hand is "more limit", then clearly, your WBL will suffer horribly from the amount of consumables you're using.


- taking a caster level and becoming a multi-class means you give up a higher level ability(ies) of the monk class (say, when deciding whether to go from level 11 to level 12 in monk gaining dimension door, a 4th level effect, and higher unarmed damage, or rather going monk 11/sorcerer 1st level and getting several 1st level spells)
And since I refer to core rules so often by now it is quite strange to hint that I am pulling the basis of my arguments on "many odd sources".

Monk 11/Sorc 1 is a terrible gish build. A gish is one that progresses both melee and casting. The standard for a decent gish build is full base attack bonus OR 9th level casting.

Typically, you can get pretty close to having the second as well, and Im sure someone out there has worked out ways to get both. Presumably any shenanigan to pick up third level casting with any full caster + 1 level of dragon disciple + Eldritch Knight + 8 levels of another eldritch knight like class would be sufficient to get 19/20 BaB and a full 20 levels of caster progression.

That's a magic + melee done right, and it'll shred the monk in a standard action without consumables.


Yes, outside of core you can do a lot of things to focus on even just a single stat.
As can the monk (say, intuitive attack feat for WIS bonus to attack).

Go nuts. But remember, monks are MAD, mkay? Especially if you're depending on stats like wisdom. So your earlier statement about being able to focus on str more than the fighter...nope.


Outside core absurd stuff is possbile for both classes I guess (or the interpretation of "nothing crazy varies more widely)
Try it in core, normal wbl, pick any level. Pharaoh's Fist was the last to try even with a multi-class build and failed.
Again note that superiority in combat should be expected since them monk can also fulfill a secondary scout role (and/or has better defenses vs magic).

This is not a core discussion. It was a general discussion about monks, not specifically about monks in core. Changing the rules to avoid admitting that your point is wrong doesn't prove anything.


It does not matter whether I cast 6 spells from scroll, or some from scroll and some from wands and some from items. When those buffs are used, the monk makes best use of them.

I didn't say casting six spells of a scroll. I said casting a level 6 spell off a scroll, which is different. Wands are not an option here.

UMD DC: 31(20+minimum CL for a level six spell)
You also need a minimum int of 16 to cast this...if not, you need to emulate it via another DC 31 UMD check(15+ 16(minimum stat needed)).

UMD is cross class, you're "focusing on strength", so you can't have that good of cha, and you have no cha synergy with your other abilities.

Antimagic field is a self only spell.

How on earth is this a "best for monks" deal?


Since it is a turn-by-turn game, that is exactly what the wizard will be doing on the monk's turn (except in case where he will ready an action, not always a good idea). Or a contingency and other powerful protective magic is at work - but again there are countertactics for that and so on...

No...he won't be standing on the ground. He'll be flying. And/or ethereal. Likely have buffs up too. Details depend on level you encounter him at, but no, the monk will not be standing there on the ground, letting you punch him. Thus, your run speed is entirely irrelevant.


Obscuring mist is 20ft radius, 40ft diameter. The monk can go through the whole diameter in a move action. It may be in a confined space (that just before you pointed out as the standard here), where the ability to cross the whole area with just one move action can be helpful.
Also, when moving silently through this (the whole point of such a tactics combined with stealth), then your speed is reduced by half or you get a penalty. Again, monk advantage.

So, you cast an obscuring mist, then move around it in rapidly. Got it.

How does this matter? How is it an advantage?


That is a very strange comparison imo.
So fighters make better use of owl's wisdom because they drink a potion of bull's strength?

- Giacomo

Fighters don't need the owl's wisdom in the first place. You're merely trying to catch up with them. They can use an equivalent buff to much better effect.

Thus, it does not prove your vaunted monk/magic synergy.

[Tyndmyr]

Hair pulling is an awesome tactic. It allows you to control your opponent. Same with grabbing loose clothing or straps. Pull their head back and punch them in the throat.

/offtopic

This brings to mind the idea of watching toddlers fight, and gambling on them. This idea seems both hilarious and suitable for a campaign setting. Now all's I need is a name for this sport.

[Drakyn]

This brings to mind the idea of watching toddlers fight, and gambling on them. This idea seems both hilarious and suitable for a campaign setting. Now all's I need is a name for this sport.

Hobbit-Wrasslin'.

[El Dorado]

Fun thing to do with your core monk class feature # 2:

You can move at half your normal speed and hide at no penalty, right? You are the ultimate Whac A Mole! Take That antimagic hee haw corn field!

[Eclipse]

I wanted to comment on the idea of monks being non-proficient with their unarmed attacks, because I've always felt this idea is bogus. And I've figured it out.

There's no such thing as proficiency or non-proficiency with unarmed attacks.

An unarmed strike is a specific combat maneuver, and monks are built around making this combat maneuver not suck. They don't quite succeed, but they make it better than it used to be.

Here are the rules for unarmed strikes in 3.5. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#unarmedStrike)

Improved unarmed strike (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedUnarmedStrike) simply gives you the option of choosing to do lethal damage with an unarmed strike, and makes you considered armed when using this maneuver so you don't take attacks of opportunity. Being a monk gives you flurry and increases the damage done by the unarmed strike maneuver.

However, there never is a nonproficiency penalty for using unarmed strikes, because it is a combat maneuver and not a weapon to be proficient in.

Any thoughts, or perhaps other obscure rules I missed that need to be addressed?

PS: I still think monks are, on the whole, a poor class choice, but this nonproficiency thing isn't the reason.

[The Glyphstone]

I wanted to comment on the idea of monks being non-proficient with their unarmed attacks, because I've always felt this idea is bogus. And I've figured it out.

There's no such thing as proficiency or non-proficiency with unarmed attacks.

An unarmed strike is a specific combat maneuver, and monks are built around making this combat maneuver not suck. They don't quite succeed, but they make it better than it used to be.

Here are the rules for unarmed strikes in 3.5. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#unarmedStrike)

Improved unarmed strike (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedUnarmedStrike) simply gives you the option of choosing to do lethal damage with an unarmed strike, and makes you considered armed when using this maneuver so you don't take attacks of opportunity. Being a monk gives you flurry and increases the damage done by the unarmed strike maneuver.

However, there never is a nonproficiency penalty for using unarmed strikes, because it is a combat maneuver and not a weapon to be proficient in.

Any thoughts, or perhaps other obscure rules I missed that need to be addressed?

PS: I still think monks are, on the whole, a poor class choice, but this nonproficiency thing isn't the reason.

Yeah, there's the little problem that Unarmed Strikes are on the list of Simple Weapons.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions

They are a weapon, therefore they have a proficiency. Some classes are proficient in all simple/martial weapons, others have specific proficiencies. Monks are of the latter category, with the resulting blindingly stupid designer oversight of forgetting to make them proficient with unarmed attacks.

[Sinfire Titan]

But I compare the highest level of damage dice the monk will ever get with the highest damage dice the fighter gets in core.
6d8 beats 3d6. Rock hard fact. No way around that.


I'll give you that fact. Yes, the Monk will have more Dice than the Fighter of equal level and equal optimization (in Core).

That does not mean his damage will be higher. If anything, it means his damage will be scattered across the RNG whereas the Fighter's 3d6+X will be only randomized by 3d6.

Furthermore, this argument is not restricted to Core only. It never has been. Saying the Monk has the highest damage dice in Core is irrelevant to this thread since the OP never specified Core. Since that is the case, the Monk's actual damage output will never match the Fighter's damage.

[Greenish]

Here are the rules for unarmed strikes in 3.5. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#unarmedStrike)I do note that you linked to the weapon "unarmed strike".

[Eclipse]

Yeah, there's the little problem that Unarmed Strikes are on the list of Simple Weapons.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions

They are a weapon, therefore they have a proficiency. Some classes are proficient in all simple/martial weapons, others have specific proficiencies. Monks are of the latter category, with the resulting blindingly stupid designer oversight of forgetting to make them proficient with unarmed attacks.

Touche'. An important detail I should have caught, particularly since I unknowingly linked to that page in one of the descriptions. :smallredface:

In which case I fall back on clear designer intent, which we know doesn't apply to RAW anyway, though it does apply to any game I've ever played in this particular instance.

You are right about the RAW though, as much as I wish I had found the counter-argument.

[Greenish]

In which case I fall back on clear designer intent, which we know doesn't apply to RAW anyway, though it does apply to any game I've ever played in this particular instance.In this case, RAI is clear as day, and no one is contesting it. :smallcool:

[Sliver]

In this case, RAI is clear as day, and no one is contesting it. :smallcool:

I disagree. The designers clearly were overcautious when designing an OP class and thought that flurry's penalty, average BAB and MAD not letting them focus on Str together with a -4 non proficiency penalty make them more balanced. Or at least waste a feat.

No, I'm not serious.

[Petrocorus]

Following some of the thing said in this thread, i tried to homebrew an alternative version of the monk. I guess i am not the first one.

I give him some new feature to make him less MAD and to be able to focus on Dex and Wis. I improved some of his class features, give him more feats and a paladin-like spell casting ability. I also let him wear some light armor.

I don't really know what all this worth. So, all comments and suggestions will be welcome.

I don't really know how to share a .doc files so i made a .png:
Here (http://yfrog.com/4walternativemonkp)

[Sliver]

Hey! Look! A forum for that stuff! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15) :smallwink:

Make it bigger.. It is quiet small and making it bigger causes major quality losses and it's a pain.

Wait.. You made flurry worse? A -3 penalty that doesn't cancel out in the end? WAT?

[Greenish]

Following some of the thing said in this thread, i tried to homebrew an alternative version of the monk. I guess i am not the first one.

I give him some new feature to make him less MAD and to be able to focus on Dex and Wis. I improved some of his class features, give him more feats and a paladin-like spell casting ability. I also let him wear some light armor.

I don't really know what all this worth. So, all comments and suggestions will be welcome.

I don't really know how to share a .doc files so i made a .png:
Here (http://yfrog.com/4walternativemonkp)There's an official update to monk class that has access to light armor and more weapons, and that can focus on dex and wis. That said, your monk does make a good two-level dip.