PDA

View Full Version : New character: Druid or Monk?



Rad
2011-04-05, 10:44 AM
Hi everybody, I'm hoping to get some help from the community here.
I'm not new at D&D but I am new to 4e and I'm about to make my first character. I'd like to be a decent controller but we already have a wizard (don't know how good, don't think that much) and I'm tired of playing wizards anyway. Also, I'd like to be able to go down and hit stuff without it being committing suicide.

I heard that druids are supposed to be controllers but with the option to wildshape and go into melee and that, conversely, monks are meleers that have enough "diverse" abilities to exercise a bit of controlling. Plus, those are archetypes I'd like to explore, so I think 'm kind of set between these two thematically as well.

Any advice? Are there any good guides for either class? Thank you in advance.

Sipex
2011-04-05, 10:51 AM
Yeah, that's essentially right. Your druid will be able to shift into it's beast form which will allow it to fight hand to hand, it can also shift into minor forms to do other things (like fly). It's got a good amount of controlling with a bit of healing on the side and some striking as well.

Your monk, however, is mostly Striker, he'll be running around the field dishing out damage to multiple targets at once and pulling of crazy kung-fu moves essentially. He can control a bit (gets in and locks down an enemy or beats up groups) but not in the sense that a druid or wizard can.

Both look very fun to play though. Maybe check out the feat support or powers?

Surrealistik
2011-04-05, 10:52 AM
Monks are so much more fun; Centred Breath Githzerai for the win.

tcrudisi
2011-04-05, 11:04 AM
I am currently playing a Wizard. My fiancée teams up with me by playing a Predator Druid. I focus 100% on control. She focuses 90% control, 10% damage. It's kinda scary, though, that her 10% damage still allows her to perform at about the same level as a Rogue.

The synergy between a Druid and Wizard is scary. There's no combat that we can't lock down. They play very well off of each other and the Druid still gets to do pretty darn good in the damage department.

The Monk is a good class. If your party needs an AoE striker, it's a great class to consider. If your party needs a controller who can bring multi-target striking most rounds, the Predator Druid is a good choice.

Nu
2011-04-05, 11:12 AM
Hi everybody, I'm hoping to get some help from the community here.
I'm not new at D&D but I am new to 4e and I'm about to make my first character. I'd like to be a decent controller but we already have a wizard (don't know how good, don't think that much) and I'm tired of playing wizards anyway. Also, I'd like to be able to go down and hit stuff without it being committing suicide.

I heard that druids are supposed to be controllers but with the option to wildshape and go into melee and that, conversely, monks are meleers that have enough "diverse" abilities to exercise a bit of controlling. Plus, those are archetypes I'd like to explore, so I think 'm kind of set between these two thematically as well.

Any advice? Are there any good guides for either class? Thank you in advance.

You could also opt for the "Sentinel" druid from Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms, which lacks wild shape but has an animal companion. The Sentinel is a leader-type that has a 2/encounter heal and still sticks to melee combat, but has access to all controller druid powers that don't involve wild shape (and there are a lot of good ones).

Of course, both the wild shape druid and monk are perfectly good options as well. As for guides, I recommend this (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19649074/The_Complete_Collection_of_Character_Build_Links) link for all of your character-building needs.

Surrealistik
2011-04-05, 11:17 AM
It should be noted that while Monks major in AoE/multitarget striking, they also minor in controlling and defending (particularly Centred Breath ones).

DragonBaneDM
2011-04-05, 02:18 PM
I am currently playing a Wizard. My fiancée teams up with me by playing a Predator Druid. I focus 100% on control. She focuses 90% control, 10% damage. It's kinda scary, though, that her 10% damage still allows her to perform at about the same level as a Rogue.

The synergy between a Druid and Wizard is scary. There's no combat that we can't lock down. They play very well off of each other and the Druid still gets to do pretty darn good in the damage department.

The Monk is a good class. If your party needs an AoE striker, it's a great class to consider. If your party needs a controller who can bring multi-target striking most rounds, the Predator Druid is a good choice.

Truly, threre is no thread that this story can't solve. :smallbiggrin:

Hm... Ima be silly. Make Wis and Dex even, then Hybrid. Don't know if it would be any good, and heck, hybrids are complicated, and you're new and all but if you're having trouble choosing, maybe not having to choose should be an option.

Daftendirekt
2011-04-05, 02:30 PM
There really are only a select few hybrid pairs that work well. Most are just awkward; they lose their best features as a hybrid, don't pair well with a certain class, or any number of other things.

You might be able to get a monk|rogue hybrid to work, but, honestly, I think Monk is probably one that you would be better off going pure with.

tcrudisi
2011-04-05, 02:41 PM
Truly, threre is no thread that this story can't solve. :smallbiggrin:

Hm... Ima be silly. Make Wis and Dex even, then Hybrid. Don't know if it would be any good, and heck, hybrids are complicated, and you're new and all but if you're having trouble choosing, maybe not having to choose should be an option.

It's true! Watch as I take it to the Twin Strike thread.

Also, I don't think the hybrid is a good idea. Druid just doesn't hybrid very well with anything, imo.

edit - /sigh. I couldn't quite bring myself to do it.

Well, look at the good news. We've started new characters for when P1 tables aren't open. (It's a lot harder to get into paragon tables around my area.) That means you'll soon be hearing about how quickly my Fighter|Battlemind and her Barbarian wreck encounters. :smalltongue: (Except we're level 2, so that's not happening much right now.)

RebelRogue
2011-04-05, 02:57 PM
I also vote against a hybrid if you're a novice 4e player.

Daftendirekt
2011-04-05, 03:00 PM
Well, look at the good news. We've started new characters for when P1 tables aren't open. (It's a lot harder to get into paragon tables around my area.) That means you'll soon be hearing about how quickly my Fighter|Battlemind and her Barbarian wreck encounters. :smalltongue: (Except we're level 2, so that's not happening much right now.)

Oh my, that is a badass image. The Battlemind with his Githyanki silver polearm side-by-side with the Barbarian wielding his massive sword/axe/hammer, tearing monsters apart with mighty swings and bursts of psionic energy.

Rad
2011-04-06, 11:34 AM
Thanks to everybody for the fast replies! I'm in the process of reading the handbooks and it'll take some time.
I'm discarding the hybrid idea because it seems very difficult to make it work and, even if I were able to make the best hybrid possible, I'm not sure it could be better than either class pure.
I think that druid might be fitting my bill better so far but I'll hear any monk-enthusiasts.

Sipex
2011-04-06, 11:41 AM
Think of it this way, what would make the game more enjoyable to you?

Laying down zones which cause status effects, causing enemies to lose turns and messing with shape shifting? Watching the DM get frustrated as his monsters become feeble and useless? Your usefulness won't be as obvious at first, you'll have to count the number of times a monster couldn't do something effectively because of you.

OR

Killing things, very efficiently. We're talking big damage numbers all the time and consistantly hitting your enemies. In addition, you dash around the field like a monkey (in a good way). Your contribution is bold and obvious, you have big damage numbers and the other players might get jealous.

I put it this way because I know people who have played classes which were not damage based and been dissapointed because they see damage as doing well. It all depends on your perception in battle.

Rad
2011-04-06, 12:05 PM
Good advice; I'm used to play as the power behind the beatstick (my last character was a 3.5 wizard with almost no direct damage spells). Actually I was a bit concerned about the monk not having enough of it.
What turned me off was the assertion, in the monk handbook, that the monk was good at AoE but meh on single targets. And I know our DM has a soft spot for big bosses.
The main point against the druid now is that it might require much more familiarity with the rules before becoming effective, so maybe a monk could be better to "learn" the system?

evirus
2011-04-06, 12:09 PM
The main point against the druid now is that it might require much more familiarity with the rules before becoming effective, so maybe a monk could be better to "learn" the system?

You don't learn if you don't try something new. I would go with the Druid. Go make some mistakes and learn. If you play the Monk, I don't think you'll be as challenged by the system.

Also, you could start with a Druid Striker build and retrain in to more of a controller role as you gain familiarity, but you can't really do the same with the Monk the other way around...

Sipex
2011-04-06, 12:10 PM
Eh, they're about the same level of complexity if you ask me and being a half-decent D&D player already you'll pick up on it relatively quickly so I wouldn't worry.

Nu
2011-04-06, 02:08 PM
What turned me off was the assertion, in the monk handbook, that the monk was good at AoE but meh on single targets. And I know our DM has a soft spot for big bosses.
The main point against the druid now is that it might require much more familiarity with the rules before becoming effective, so maybe a monk could be better to "learn" the system?

Keep in mind, the guide is speaking from a character optimization standpoint. As a monk, you can still push your single-target damage high enough that you'll outperform most non-strikers in the single-target damage department. It does have more of an AoE bent than, say, rangers and rogues, and it pays a bit for this in single-target damage compared to them, but it's perfectly capable. It's hard to make a sucky character in 4th edition as long as you stay away from hybrids and have at least a +3 mod in your primary stat (+4 is preferred, some/many can afford a +5).

tcrudisi
2011-04-06, 03:43 PM
Monks can do satisfactory single target damage, but it's a lot like taking a Porsche and refusing to drive over 25. It can do so much more; you are just not letting it open up. It'll be a nice smooth ride, too. But if you crank that baby up to 170, it might be a little bumpy, but boy oh boy can you really see what it can do.

My analogies never make sense, so pretend that one does. What I'm trying to say is: if you stick with single-target damage, you are really holding yourself back. If you want to cruise at that speed, there are better options. If you want to really open up and attack everything on the field at once, the Monk is the way to go. Can you do single-target? Sure. That's just not it's area of specialty.

MeeposFire
2011-04-06, 05:07 PM
Monks are strikers with a side of control (or defender especially with iron soul).

Druids can be controller with a side of striker (at least with wild shape druids).

What would you like more?

Or perhaps since both are good-what would you like to play, a monk style character from a monastery or do you like druid fluff more.

DragonBaneDM
2011-04-06, 06:27 PM
Hm... Something we should really be considering is the rest of the party. We know you guys have a wizard, but what about other strikers?

ImperiousLeader
2011-04-06, 09:13 PM
I have both a Monk and a Druid in various campaigns.

What I like about my Druid ... versatility. I've got Fire Hawk to lock down ranged monsters or simply peg targets from a distance, Grasping Tide to keep monsters clustered together and Savage Rend when I want to mix it up in melee ... and that's just my at-wills!

What I like about my Monk ... mobility. Druids are mobile too ... but Monks are awesome. If there's someplace on the board I want to be ... I can get there. My melee strikes are solid, though to be honest, I wish I hit harder. Especially compared to seeing some of the Essentials strikers. That said, I have really good defenses ... I've triggered OAs just to let the Defenders get some more damage in.

Rad
2011-04-07, 09:15 AM
Here's a few more details:

the party so far has a Wizard, a Warlock and a Rogue. There might be a 4th person which will probably be some sort of beatstick but I'm not sure if he'll be another striker or a defender. I guess this points to not another striker, right?

Optimization level is unknown since I never played D&D with anybody except the DM. I expect it to be quite low although I could be surprised. This means I can freely make a few sub-optimal choices for flavor reasons and it might actually be better if I do so that I don't overshadow others. Being a good controller is also a proven technique for me (in 3.5) to have a strong character that does not steal the spotlight too much.

The party is level 2 (might be 3 before I join) and I'll be seriously surprised if we ever get over level 10. Needless to say, I'll need something that is fun at lower levels rather than preparing for the cool epic stuff.

The rogue is a kender (technically an halfling since we're in the FR, but he plays like one). This usually bugs me and I'd like to avoid having to play the straight guy to it. I could avoid it by playing an halfling monk, but druid feels better here.

I'm fin with both archetypes really. They're quite different but I feel like exploring both. I'll just do the other next time.

tcrudisi
2011-04-07, 09:27 AM
the party so far has a Wizard, a Warlock and a Rogue. There might be a 4th person which will probably be some sort of beatstick but I'm not sure if he'll be another striker or a defender. I guess this points to not another striker, right?

The most glaring omission is a leader. This party seriously needs a healer of some sort. The good news? Leaders in 4e are fun. Healing is no longer a chore. The cleric doesn't go "I spend my turn healing you." Instead, the cleric goes, "I hit it for 13 damage, the Rogue gets a +3 to his next attack roll against the guy I just hit, and, oh, I guess I'll throw the Warlock a heal." The heals are pretty much afterthoughts. You can still attack and move. So there's nowhere near the stigma of being a healer in 4e as there was in 3e.

The bad news? Leaders are also underappreciated. Just yesterday, I saw the Hexblade hit the target only because of a +5 to hit the leader had given him. This wasn't the first time in the session; it had happened a few times already. The leader said, "Thanks, leader!" Yep, he was being sarcastic (and wasn't actually being rude), just pointing out that the leader never gets the credit. The striker got to do 59 points of damage that would have missed were it not for the leader, yet the leader never got so much as a thanks and the striker looked like the hero. C'est la vie.

If you are 100% for either Druid or Monk, I would definitely go Druid. They can do a secondary in leader and help to shore up some of the weaknesses of this group. They have ways of healing (not nearly as well as a leader) and improving allies (ditto), but at least someone could do it.

Sipex
2011-04-07, 09:31 AM
Oh yeah, leaders definitely get the shaft in appreciation. It's not bad persay, everyone is thankful when they're hit by a heal or when they receive a buff but nobody ever talks about how the awesome moment in battle X was only because of the leader.

I find, as a DM, you can aid this by mentioning the leader's contributions when they matter. "Alright, and that's a 22 which would normally miss but because of Eric's +2 bonus to hit he granted you, you hit."

DragonBaneDM
2011-04-07, 10:35 AM
Given your last post, I'm throwing my hat in with the above two posts. By not playing having a leader, your party is essentially crippled.

It's like having a ton of forwards, but no goalie. You've already said you like playing a strong support instead of stealing the spotlight. Maybe this should be your true calling?

MeeposFire
2011-04-07, 12:59 PM
Sentinel druid may very well be your best choice then. The companion will help spread damage around and healing better for your party in combat (which will be very nice since you lack a defender) and you encounter power is versatile and at the very least will make you act like a striker. This will also help your party get the heals they need. Pick a power like grasping tide and you will have some nice control options.

Rad
2011-04-07, 01:48 PM
Hummm... I'm not exactly sure what does a leader do exactly? I thought it was something like a buffer (which I find a bit unsatisfactory), but most of you are mentioning healing as their main concern.
On the Sentinel druid idea, where is it from? I see mentions of it everywhere but it's not in the PHB2, is it?
Also, I'm not sure if trying to do 3 roles all by myself is a good idea. I thought there were no one-man-parties in 4e (or at least they tried really hard this time).

evirus
2011-04-07, 01:54 PM
Hummm... I'm not exactly sure what does a leader do exactly? I thought it was something like a buffer (which I find a bit unsatisfactory), but most of you are mentioning healing as their main concern.
On the Sentinel druid idea, where is it from? I see mentions of it everywhere but it's not in the PHB2, is it?
Also, I'm not sure if trying to do 3 roles all by myself is a good idea. I thought there were no one-man-parties in 4e (or at least they tried really hard this time).

Every character deals damage. In addition leaders can as minor actions Heal/Buff and often at the same time.

Kylarra
2011-04-07, 01:58 PM
Sentinel Druid is from Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms out of the 4EE line.

MeeposFire
2011-04-07, 01:58 PM
Sentinel druids are found in "Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdom". They are a leader that does not do too many buffs so that may be up your alley.

They get to choose any one druid at will and any druid dailies. They get to use healing word sort of like a cleric. They also get an animal companion that you can bring back easily.

They won't do everything at once but you can build them to be able to handle two very well or three alright. Pick a good controlling at will like grasping tide and pick some nice daily powers (I like summons myself) and you can be a decent controller and you are automatically a fair leader. Your encounter power is chosen for you but it is a versatile power (you make a melee attack and then your animal companion moves and attacks either the same target or a different one). They are very well rounded.

DragonBaneDM
2011-04-07, 02:34 PM
Hummm... I'm not exactly sure what does a leader do exactly? I thought it was something like a buffer (which I find a bit unsatisfactory), but most of you are mentioning healing as their main concern.

Healing can be the main focus of a leader, namely the cleric. If you're a man of action, I'd recommend a strong enabler, that is, somone who lets his allies do stuff when it's not their turn.

Take a peak at the Warlord, even if it's just a glance. Hope I'm not derailing this idea, but I honestly think you'd do more help to your party as a leader rather than a monk or druid.

If it doesn't seem to be your thing, don't sweat it and play what ya want, this is just an extra option.

AtlanteanTroll
2011-04-07, 02:36 PM
You could multiclass and play a drunk.

Nu
2011-04-07, 03:08 PM
Sentinel druids are found in "Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdom". They are a leader that does not do too many buffs so that may be up your alley.

They get to choose any one druid at will and any druid dailies. They get to use healing word sort of like a cleric. They also get an animal companion that you can bring back easily.

They won't do everything at once but you can build them to be able to handle two very well or three alright. Pick a good controlling at will like grasping tide and pick some nice daily powers (I like summons myself) and you can be a decent controller and you are automatically a fair leader. Your encounter power is chosen for you but it is a versatile power (you make a melee attack and then your animal companion moves and attacks either the same target or a different one). They are very well rounded.

Indeed, you can pick almost all of the summoning dailies and have a nice leader/controller character (because leader and controller are just two sides of the same coin really, buffing or debuffing, you still have your healing in utilities and healing word, and enabling was never the Sentinel's strong point anyway). And Grasping Tide is just a nice power, though if you don't have access to Player's Handbook Heroes, Fire Hawk will do nicely (Primal Power).

If you feel inadequate as a leader Sentinel who takes controller powers, I suggest the Spirit Talker and Mending Spirit feats, for an extra heal/encounter and further control in the form of a spirit companion (between yourself, your spirit companion, your animal companion, and any summons you have active you can take up a lot of room on the battlefield, and the wording on the animal companion and spirit companion let you move them both and yourself as a single action).

If the sentinel doesn't sound right for you, there are other leaders who can take on a more offensive bent, like Bravura Warlords (Martial Power). Many leaders also have a healthy dose of control in their powers, since they really are similar roles in many ways (Animist Shaman, Dark Sun).

Rad
2011-04-12, 06:06 AM
so... correction on the above statements. The party is much bigger than I thought an counts a Rogue, Ranger, Barbarian, Warlock and Wizard. And the wizard is being an (uneffective) blaster rather than doing control.
Sooo... druid it is. And Sentinel if allowed. Maybe even cleric.
Thank you all for your advice!