MONK: Monktion Junction, what's your Function?

[visigani]

You know... people always rag on the Monk, but I think the Monk is one of the best classes out there.

The function of the monk, so far as I can tell is to be the Non-Consuming Fifth Man.

When it comes to "not consuming party resources" it's really hard to beat this guy.

You don't need to cast cure poison on him and usually not cure disease (and any resotration necessary).

He resist magic from any number of sources and so you need not cast resist magic on him, or, heaven forbid you aren't able to you're far less likely to need to heal him.

The monk can act as scout, diplomat, emergency medic and has a host of other abilities at his or her disposal... all without using up a single spell slot or spending a dime.


What the monk does, and what so many people overlook, is that they contribute to the fight as a secondary combatant and skill monkey while consuming far fewer party resources than either.

The bard also falls into the fifth man category, but his benefits are extroverted, rather than introverted, and he consumes more than the Monk does.

[Killer Angel]

I agree that the monk doesn't consume party resources: sometimes, you don't even cast Raise Dead on it. :smallamused:

[Amphetryon]

A class that can cast buffs and heals on other party members/itself is, by default, consuming less of the other party's resources than one that is not.

All of the resources you're touting as 'not needing to expend' on the Monk, don't actually indicate a contribution by the character, simply a theoretical lack of resource drain, which isn't actually true in most folks' experience. Monks need magic help to keep their AC and saves relevant, and considerable magic help to make their damage output keep pace with their apparent role of ... stationary skirmisher, for wont of a better description. They cannot deal with incorporeal or flying creatures without magic or, at least, without specific racial choices, either.

TL;DR - I think you're touting a benefit that is illusory, and that could be ascribed to equipment as easily as to a party member. Backpacks don't cost many valuable party resources, either. :smallwink:

[Eldariel]

What exactly is the purpose of this post? To educate people of how wrong people are about the Monk? I mean, one would think there would be at least some degree of respect for 8 years of number crunching and practical experience... I mean, I just don't understand the mentality. "People talk about X, I disagree, so people are wrong." Where exactly is the logic in that? Wouldn't it be more agreeable to present your ideas in the form of a question; "Have people thought of this and why have they come to different conclusions than me?"

Ok, fine. Why would you have a Monk over a Cleric/Druid as the 5th man? Monk doesn't need to be cured of poison or disease; big whoop. Poisons heal themselves fast if they don't kill you anyways and diseases are by and large a joke. They'll resist spells...on level 13. Cleric or Druid could heal all those ailments much earlier on both, themselves and others, and while at it, bring actually useful stuff like Restoration, Heroes' Feast and such to the table. And they get those abilities on relevant levels.


So if Monk consumes few party resources, Clerics and Druids consume under zero since not only can they handle any ailments on themselves but they can expand those protections to allies too. And Bard is quite self-sufficient on that front too, by the way, while providing a much better scout, diplomat, etc. because of spells and extra skill points. And a secondary combatant. Same goes to Rogue.

[Psyren]

You know... people always rag on the Monk, but I think the Monk is one of the best classes out there.

The function of the monk, so far as I can tell is to be the Non-Consuming Fifth Man.

When it comes to "not consuming party resources" it's really hard to beat this guy.

You don't need to cast cure poison on him and usually not cure disease (and any resotration necessary).

The problem here is that you're looking at one specific type of party resource when making this assessment of the monk.

First off, though a monk may not need disease and poison removal later on, he DOES need magical buffs to be competitive in a fight that other martial classes do not, so it ends up cancelling this benefit out. (In other words, your monk is still using up party buffs and consumables - just different ones.)

And secondly, poison immunity comes online at 11th level - chances are that poison is a relevant threat before then. Even once the party hits 11, other threats become relevant that the monk will need to deal with, like flying enemies and damage reduction.


The monk can act as scout, diplomat, emergency medic and has a host of other abilities at his or her disposal... all without using up a single spell slot or spending a dime.

Scout is a workable function for one. The trouble here though is that other classes can perform this function better and bring more to the table besides. For instance, a monk can be fast and sneaky, but will not have the trapfinding necessary to be a truly good scout.


What the monk does, and what so many people overlook, is that they contribute to the fight as a secondary combatant and skill monkey while consuming far fewer party resources than either.

4+Int skills is far too low for a skill monkey - especially one that likely does not have the point buy to spare for a high Int score anyway.


The bard also falls into the fifth man category, but his benefits are extroverted, rather than introverted, and he consumes more than the Monk does.

This is quite false - Bards have innate spellcasting and UMD as class skills, both of which put them ahead of the Monk on a prima facie basis. Their higher skill points and lower MAD round out their superiority in terms of party resource consumption.

[LordBlades]

{scrubbed}

Let's assume the monk really requires no resources expenditure (which is fake, but let's assume it for the sake of argument) from the other party members.

A full caster could also not require any resource expenditure from the other party members as he can provide his own buffs that at least duplicate the monk's immunities. However, the said full caster is unlikely to consume all his spell slots in doing so, which means he also has the ability to contribute to overcoming encounters, which an unbuffed monk sadly does not.

[Eldan]

Looking at it purely from the resource standpoint:

There are a few resources that the monk does not consume, yes. However, this is more or less made up for by two other problems:

1) Monks do not add resources to the party, or very little. Monks have no spells. Their special abilities are rarely useful, very limited, and come into play much too late. Their combat output is bad, lacking in both the ability to hit reliably, and to deal sufficient amounts of damage.

2) Monks consume other resources: their armour class, for all their class abilities, is barely that of a fighter, and they have fewer hit points (doubly so, actually, since they have more stats to invest in, so their con is most likely lower). What does that mean? They get wounded more often, and die more. Which means they require more healing and more raising. They provide some healing for themselves, but it probably does not make up for it.

So, monks add 0, and consume X. Total resources added to the party: -X.

Other light secondary fighter classes, like the scout or rogue usually have good sources of extra damage, so they can contribute to a fight. They also have more skills which are useful outside of a fight, like the thievery skills. While they are just as fragile, they add more to a party.

[Sir Homeslice]

Being a good fifth man is about as useful as being the best candidate for presidency of Pileofdirtistan. In theory it's nice, but you're still the president of Pileofdirtistan, a country that is a pile of dirt and has about as much power as a cardboard shovel trying to dig a hole.

[warmachine]

{Scrubbed]

Diplomat? Emergency medic? Skill monkey? Don't make me laugh.

[Psyren]

Being a good fifth man is about as useful as being the best candidate for presidency of Pileofdirtistan. In theory it's nice, but you're still the president of Pileofdirtistan, a country that is a pile of dirt and has about as much power as a cardboard shovel trying to dig a hole.

It's actually not a bad idea to have a "5th-man" - i.e. a party member that can slip into various roles if the dedicated performer of that function is either rendered incapable or needs backup. From a metagame standpoint, this is also a useful role for the player that doesn't have a set character concept in mind and/or wants to be able to fill in whatever gap the party is lacking on a moment-to-moment basis.

The problem is that there are so many better choices for 5th-man than a Monk. T3 (Binders, Bards, Incarnates, Factotum etc.) excel at this. Need an extra meatshield in a pinch? Want to scout two paths instead of just one? Meet with two rival kings on the same day? Did a poor roll K.O. your trapmonkey? All of these are situations where a 5th-man can shine, and a party without one will be less than ideal.

[Noneoyabizzness]

the flaw of the monk is not that he is the nonconsuming 5th, he is the free rider.

the bard offers the ultimate 5th experience. all the primary 3.5 roles already filled he supplements and buffs.

as stated otherwise if having an added dmg output, roguish types, warmage, or psionic characters can do it better. if looking for a degree of strangeness, binder or incarnum much better. if looking for a hand to hand expert battle dancer much better. if looking for alignment superiority, pally ftw

[Eldariel]

It's actually not a bad idea to have a "5th-man" - i.e. a party member that can slip into various roles if the dedicated performer of that function is either rendered incapable or needs backup. From a metagame standpoint, this is also a useful role for the player that doesn't have a set character concept in mind and/or wants to be able to fill in whatever gap the party is lacking on a moment-to-moment basis.

The problem is that there are so many better choices for 5th-man than a Monk. T3 (Binders, Bards, Incarnates, Factotum etc.) excel at this. Need an extra meatshield in a pinch? Want to scout two paths instead of just one? Meet with two rival kings on the same day? Did a poor roll K.O. your trapmonkey? All of these are situations where a 5th-man can shine, and a party without one will be less than ideal.

Druid is the king of 5th wheels. Need warrior? Got 2! Need support caster? Right here! Need control/offensive caster? Got it! Need skills? Got a bunch, then some, and a bunch of spells to replicate them!

Only things Druids don't do out of the box is find traps that can't be triggered by running hapless animals into them. All Tier 1 classes can, of course, do anything but Druids do it (almost) all without effort.

[warmachine]

In an attempt to stop this thread, let us consider the combat roles a Monk could fulfil.
Tank: poor armour and damage dealing. Opportunist striker: speed is good but 2/3 BAB progression and no strike capability isn't. Battlefield control/debuffer: no spells or area effect abilities. Artillery: poor ranged weapons. Buffer/healer: no spells.


Perhaps non-combat roles.

Face man: CHA tends to be a dump stat and lacks Bluff as a class skill. Investigator: lacks some skills as class skills, such as Gather Information and Search, only has only 4+INT skills and no spells either. Sage: only 4+INT skills with INT being a low priority and most sage skills aren't class skills. Healer: next! Thief: better but lacks Open Lock and Disable Device and no spells either. Scout: good stealth and speed is more like it.


How about being cool or fun.
Behave like an uncouth barbarian: no. Strut around like a rockstar: Bard. Touchy-feely love: no. Nag people to behave themselves: doesn't fit whereas this fits Cleric or Paladin. Lesbian, stripper ninja: this works. Emo kid: doesn't fit, try or half-orc or Warlock. Kung fu hijinks: now you're talking.


The Monk's function is to have act like a kung fu movie hero except he's rubbish at fighting. He is a good scout though. So is a Rogue who can perform more roles as well.

[Killer Angel]

Dilpomat? Emergency medic? Skill monkey? Don't make me laugh.

well, with partially charged wands... :smalltongue:

[FMArthur]

Maybe a Monk who has given up entirely on being useful in combat (which is all but a lost cause anyway) can spare the point spread to be a scout/diplomat, favoring their absolute least useful combat stats (Int and Cha).

Only the Druid, Monk and Rogue in core get all of Diplomacy, Listen and Spot, and the Monk does have high saves and fast movement. I'm pretty sure the Rogue's trapfinding beats that though, and the Druid can beat it in every way as usual. Neither the Druid nor Rogue would need to make the same sacrifices to combat utility that a Monk would in order to be an effective scout/diplomat, and the Monk being bad at combat doesn't actually make him any better a skillmonkey, just less useful overall.

[Psyren]

if looking for a hand to hand expert battle dancer much better.

Battle Dancers are not much better than monks, and are indeed worse in some ways. Not only do they lack many of a monk's immunities, they also have poor fort and will saves - both of these are unfortunate drawbacks for a melee character.

Though full BAB and built-in Pounce are certainly pluses.

@ Eldariel - The hallmark of T1 (and even T2) is that they can do everything T3 can and more, I didn't think I needed to specify that :smalltongue: You are correct though that Druids can perform this function better than anyone at all levels.

[Greenish]

The Monk's function is to have act like a kung fu movie hero except he's rubbish at fighting.Perform is a class skill, though. :smallcool:

[Eldariel]

@ Eldariel - The hallmark of T1 (and even T2) is that they can do everything T3 can and more, I didn't think I needed to specify that :smalltongue: You are correct though that Druids can perform this function better than anyone at all levels.

It can be useful to bring up for a discussion like this, where there are participants who are probably unaware of the tier system, and the basic arguments are often drawn back to "in CORE!" when options like Factotum/Binder/Incarnate are brought up :smallwink:

[visigani]

In an attempt to stop this thread, let us consider the combat roles a Monk could fulfil.
Tank: poor armour and damage dealing. Opportunist striker: speed is good but 2/3 BAB progression and no strike capability isn't. Battlefield control/debuffer: no spells or area effect abilities. Artillery: poor ranged weapons. Buffer/healer: no spells.


Perhaps non-combat roles.

Face man: CHA tends to be a dump stat and lacks Bluff as a class skill. Investigator: lacks some skills as class skills, such as Gather Information and Search, only has only 4+INT skills and no spells either. Sage: only 4+INT skills with INT being a low priority and most sage skills aren't class skills. Healer: next! Thief: better but lacks Open Lock and Disable Device and no spells either.


How about being cool or fun.
Behave like an uncouth barbarian: no. Strut around like a rockstar: Bard. Touchy-feely love: no. Nag people to behave themselves: doesn't fit whereas this fits Cleric or Paladin. Lesbian, stripper ninja: this works. Emo kid: doesn't fit, try or half-orc or Warlock. Kung fu hijinks: now you're talking.


The Monk's function is to have act like a kung fu movie hero except he's rubbish at fighting.



Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.

Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

Your monk is better able to dodge touch attacks, rays, etc etc... Your fighter? Not so much.

God help your fighter if he finds himself in an anti-magic field or the target of a dispel.



Opportunist? See Quivering palm/Stunning Fist. And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.

Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

[Darth Stabber]

Why are we feeding this troll? can we get Moderator to lock this down or something, because this is trolling at it's most obvious.

[Greenish]

Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?Most level-appropriate monsters or NPCs.


If your foe is a Wizard, for exampleYou don't want to go into wizard vs. monk.


He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.Rangers can get Trapfinding if they want to. Swift hunters will have it by default.


Really, couldn't you have read one of the million threads on this before making your own?

[Noneoyabizzness]

Battle Dancers are not much better than monks, and are indeed worse in some ways. Not only do they lack many of a monk's immunities, they also have poor fort and will saves - both of these are unfortunate drawbacks for a melee character.

Though full BAB and built-in Pounce are certainly pluses.


in practice, most of the monks immunities are useless and likely better done by items. the lessening of those two saves is a bit tragic but again, rogues are not considered less than as a melee fighter due to their saves.

full bab, power attack boosts battlefield manuevering, tumble trick beyond the monk, ability to boost the party against fear effects, and eventual flight with boosts to charging in flight, the monks abilities in a fight pale by comparison

[LordBlades]

Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.

So that's the monk's niche? Fighting against retarded wizards?


Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

Also, in order to succeed on any of that (unless the wizard is retarded, which he might be if he's firing ref: partial, SR:yes spells at a Monk) you'd have to be flying and find a way to bypass both very high AC and high miss chance, as well as any of the huge number of contingent spells the wizard might have prepared. And then hope the wizard fails his save.

Focusing on stuff that actually can be tanked (this excludes spellcasters) leaves the fighter as a much better tank.




Opportunist? See Quivering palm/Stunning Fist. And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.

The Stunning Fist DC is pretty pathetic, and so is the one for Quivering Palm, especially vs melee monsters, which have Fort as best save. Not to mention you need to hit them with medium BAB and an average Str score, and Quivering Palm is 1/week.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.
Except you probably have Cha as your dump stat unlike a Paladin.


Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

Ranger has Summon Nature's Ally, which he can use to trigger traps, not to mention the Trapfinding ACF in Dungeonscape.

[Psyren]

Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.
...
Your monk is better able to dodge touch attacks, rays, etc etc... Your fighter? Not so much.

Fighter is also a weak class - that does not mean that the Monk is strong. This is not a meaningful comparison.


Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

1) If your monk does successfully get in close, the better option is to grapple as that is at least a touch attack (and provokes an opposed check rather than a saving throw.)

2) You are assuming a wizard with no buffs at all, which is totally unrealistic. Even a simple Blur spell can throw a wrench in this scenario.


God help your fighter if he finds himself in an anti-magic field or the target of a dispel.

This scenario hurts the monk just as much. He can't fly in an AMF, put Ghost Touch on his fists etc.


And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.

Assuming he can get in close, land the hit, the target fails its save etc.

And that's just for casters - the chances of taking out a fort-heavy combatant are exponentially lower.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.

If his Int and Cha are high enough to actually use these, his Wis, Dex or Con are suffering and therefore he is underperforming at his primary role.


Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

1) Of course Rangers can disarm traps. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonNaturesAllyI.htm)

2) Rangers at least have Search, and can get Trapfinding as was mentioned. Monks have neither.

[Eldariel]

Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.

Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

Doesn't help the party. He can't do a **** to tank even against retarded Wizards, let alone smart ones. The AoEs still hit everyone else regardless of what the Monk does.

And if Monk can get to try Stunning on Wizard, Fighter can kill the Wizard with the same opportunity window reliably (or at the very least Trip the Wizard and keep him in a position where he cannot cast due to Mage Slayer and Thicket of Blades), with much better chance to hit due to higher attack bonus. That's a Wizard messing up, and anyone with the capability to attack can take advantage of it; most better than the Monk.


Your monk is better able to dodge touch attacks, rays, etc etc... Your fighter? Not so much.

God help your fighter if he finds himself in an anti-magic field or the target of a dispel.

Monk is equally screwed as the Fighter if in AMF or target of a Dispel. You can't attack flying opponents (Fighters at least have Bow Proficiencies & full BAB), you can't hit incorporeals and all your defenses are turned off. Monk's abilities are primarily SUPERNATURAL which means they are turned off in an AMF too.

Think what an adventurer needs and you'll realize Monks need more magic items than the most, because their kit doesn't cover the important areas and they have some glaring flaws like Shurikens as their only ranged weaponry.

Yeah, Monk has better Touch AC but beyond early levels, not good enough to protect him and he has spectacularly poor AC compared to anyone wearing armor (level 1, Fighter easily gets 18-20 armor depending on Dex and Shield; Monk has 16 if he's lucky with stat rolls and has 2 16s as secondary and tertiary stats - more realistically 14 with good Str, 14 Dex, 14 Wis).

Chances are your AC will be hit more commonly than your Touch AC (and Fighters can get similar touch AC with magic items; Ghost Ward adds enhancement from armor and shield to Touch AC, for example, neither of which Monk can wear so that's eventual +10 to Fighter Touch AC Monk doesn't have access to).


Opportunist? See Quivering palm/Stunning Fist. And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.

Quivering Palm is once per week. For all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist. Stunning Fist is fine, but you need to pump your Wis for the DC, everyone else can learn it, crit immune opponents (anyone with Greater Fortifications armor or various spells or undead/construct/elemental/plant/ooze) aren't affected by it and it's wasted if your attack misses.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.

Rogues get it too. He's just as much primary melee as Monk. Both suck at being melee, btw.


Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

He can't find traps. That means he'll step on them, trigger them and at best only alert the whole dungeon of intruders and their exact location (at worst, just collapse the whole damn thing on your necks and kill you or summon an Elder Elemental or whatever). Which makes for spectacularly poor scouting.

[Darth Stabber]

Poor Tank? Well, against who, precisely?

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.

Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

Your monk is better able to dodge touch attacks, rays, etc etc... Your fighter? Not so much.

God help your fighter if he finds himself in an anti-magic field or the target of a dispel.



Opportunist? See Quivering palm/Stunning Fist. And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.

Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

It has been shown repeatedly that wizard that only rolls twos for everything, spanks a monk who only rolls 20s for everything. The only thing that beats a wizard is a more paranoid wizard.

Bard, gets both diplomacy and sense motive, and contribure to the fight via spells, and bardic music. And with dragon fire inspiration gives the fighter more bonus damage on one attack than the monk will deal the entire battle. And he gets more other skills, and haste, which is better than your best combat trick (flurry of misses), and is only one spell.

Stunning fist and quivering palm are absolute crap, compare to Power Attack+shock trooper+pounce+leap attack+greatsword, and that's not even trying. Stunning fist and quivering palm are easily negated, 3 instances if 2d6+100 damage is not, and that is assuming only assuming fighter14/barbarian 1 with a 20 str and no buffs, and his only feats are the above PA combo and toughness for the rest of his feats, and it works in an antimagic field. Now the fighter has an armor class of -5 after doing this, but it matters little when your enemy is now a flaming pile of wreakage laying at your feet. If removing people from combat is battlefield control,we can safely say dead is more removed than stunned. Stunning fist and quiveringp palm offer a save, and do not effect undead, and contructs, where as there is very little that remains unaffected by a bucket full of damage.

Or fighter can take improved trip+EWP spiked chain+combat reflexes, and be one buff spell (enlarge person) away from requiring everything on the battlefield to ask his permission to do anything.

And ranger can disarm traps, its called summon nature's ally 1.

[Tytalus]

well, with partially charged wands... :smalltongue:

Nice.

What ever happened to Sir G.? Last time I heard from he was just about to post a revolutionary new monk guide.


So that's the monk's niche? Fighting against retarded wizards?

I LOL'd.

[Eldariel]

Nice.

What ever happened to Sir G.? Last time I heard from he was just about to post a revolutionary new monk guide.

Hammer. Ban-shaped. It's against forum rules to talk about banned members, so nothing more to add here.

[Talya]

The monk has very good saving throws (though not nearly as good as someone who has multiclassed a lot), is very fast, and has a nice variety of non-synergistic class features.

The problem is, they can't actually do anything useful.

They cannot hit you reliably.
If they manage to hit you, they cannot do a lot of damage.
They cannot avoid getting hit.
They cannot soak up hits when they get hit.
Past the early levels, they're not very good at tripping or disarming either.

[Psyren]

What ever happened to Sir G.? Last time I heard from he was just about to post a revolutionary new monk guide.

Banned - which is therefore all we can say.


in practice, most of the monks immunities are useless and likely better done by items. the lessening of those two saves is a bit tragic but again, rogues are not considered less than as a melee fighter due to their saves.

Rogues' saves don't matter as much because they have the option of fighting at range without losing much effectiveness (in situations where they don't have a flanking buddy), which means they can get by with a weaker fort save. Battle Dancers also lack evasion, which is a pretty big minus (especially at low levels.)

You can nullify poison and disease immunity with items, sure - but that's two more items the BD needs to be safe. The BD also shares the monk's problem of (Su) overload, shutting off many of their moves (including their pounce) in an AMF.

The flight is nice but in practice won't be very relevant - it doesn't come online until 17 anyway.

[warmachine]

Monks do make good scouts because of their speed, stealth and survivability. But little else. So they do have a function: as a comic cohort or sidekick. Send him ahead and if he makes his stealth rolls, he returns to the party with info of the enemy ahead. If he fails, he runs back screaming. No player will be upset that another seems to have one and a half characters because he's really only worth about a fifth. Indeed, the cohort's Flurry of Misses will be a source of amusement.

[Talya]

Monk is okay as a base to a standalone, self-sufficient PrC, or as a base for a class combination that can make good use of a couple monk features without sucking. (Monk/unarmed swordsage/shadow sun ninja, or monk/cleric/sacred fist). But as a standalone class, it makes any fighter look like they have divine ranks.

[Eldariel]

Monks do make good scouts because of their speed, stealth and survivability.

As long as there are no traps around. Again, Monks can't even find traps because they lack Trapfinding, the Search-skill and even the basic Int-modifier Search is based on. This isn't even about disarming them; Monks have no way of avoiding plain walking into a trap while scouting.

And if you go for stealth + observational skills, the setup you need for scouting, you just spent Monk's whole skill point allotment (4+Int, which very likely isn't above 4, for Move Silently, Hide, Spot & Listen; misses out on such trivialities as Tumble and Diplomacy too).

[TOZ]

Monks do work as scouts. They are the best trapfinders because they have the highest defenses against them. So they find them by triggering them and surviving.:smallsmile:

[Talya]

Monks do work as scouts. They are the best trapfinders because they have the highest defenses against them. So they find them by triggering them and surviving.:smallsmile:

If corrected, this is actually a decent use for a monk. Then the monk player can reroll something useful!

[FMArthur]

What? Monks do have good saves, and Evasion. They're weak overall, but that's not a weak point of the class. You really can use them as trap-plows. :smallconfused:

[Eldariel]

Monks do work as scouts. They are the best trapfinders because they have the highest defenses against them. So they find them by triggering them and surviving.:smallsmile:

Except those mechanical traps using attack rolls. And those traps you really don't want to trigger; the ones someone might actually bother using. Like Alarm, Gate (CR 10, btw), Disintegrate McGuffin, collapse section of the dungeon, etc. Triggering traps (especially magical ones) is generally a v. bad idea unless you literally have a party of Gods capable of dealing with everything that exists within the system of D&D 3.5, in which case it probably would be a Celestial Monkey, not the Monk, doing the facechecking :smallwink: For places where it matters, why bothers making traps the intruder can survive by being lucky/quick/strongwilled/hardy?

[Talya]

What? Monks do have good saves, and Evasion. They're weak overall, but that's not a weak point of the class. You really can use them as trap-plows. :smallconfused:

And lowish hit points due to not having any buy points left to put into constitution. In addition, some traps target AC (another low point for a monk) or non-reflex saves.

[TOZ]

If corrected, this is actually a decent use for a monk. Then the monk player can reroll something useful!

Pit trap = Slow Fall.

Fireball trap = Evasion/Imp Evasion.

Arrow Trap = Deflect Arrows.

Disease/Poison = Diamond/Wholeness of Body.

Crushing Ceiling = Abundant Step/Empty Body.

Magical Death Trap = Diamond Soul.

Is it perfect? No. Is it a role? Yes.

[FMArthur]

Ah, that would do it. My groups never run into AC-targetting traps. A Monk's flat-footed AC is particularly low, being just the AC bonus and no armor.

[Talya]

Pit trap = Slow Fall.

Yay! Assuming it's a small enough pit for their level, they can slow fall right into that giant gelatinous cube at the bottom!


Fireball trap = Evasion/Imp Evasion.

Once again, their hit points are very low, and they don't get improved evasion for a long time (9th level). All it takes is a bad roll, and they're dead. After improved evasion, even half damage is gonna hurt them.


Arrow Trap = Deflect Arrows.
Combat Reflexes is by far the better feat, but yes, they might get to deflect one of the arrows.



Disease/Poison = Diamond/Wholeness of Body.
Does anyone actually use nonmagical diseases for anything?
Wholeness of body doesn't really help here. That's for hit point damage, which probably killed you if you took it. Poison, yes, they can be immune to that -- after level 11. Let's face it, the party had to drag you along for the last 10 levels without you contributing in the first place to get that far, so I won't begrudge you that one.



Crushing Ceiling = Abundant Step/Empty Body.

Yeah, once a day starting at 12... Better hope your party stayed WAY back...then you can do it again at 19 with empty body.



Magical Death Trap = Diamond Soul.

If it allows SR. Which it wouldn't if it were my trap.

One thing to remember, too -- all it takes is one save failure and they're dead anyway. Anybody you use as a "trap plow" is doomed. Monks are no exception.

[Eldariel]

Is it perfect? No. Is it a role? Yes.

Eh, "walking into traps" is hardly a role. The role is "disabling traps" or "handling traps" and there's a bunch of classes that are actually fairly good at it mostly because they don't jeopardize the mission/the party when they do their stuff. Monk is...well, not the next best thing but slightly better than the Fighter at it. Probably worse than Barbarian since Barbarian can facetank all manner of damage very easily and has Trap Sense (lol). That's not really saying much though. Basically, any class that cannot actually locate and disable or circumvent the traps is not a feasible choice for this party role.


Again, any spell can be made into a traps, as can many very unpleasant mechanical contraptions. Triggering a trap of Gate that brings in a Pit Fiend on level 10 is very possibly a TPK and very definitely a dead Monk. And that's a CR 10 trap (l0l CR system, btw). So obviously, walking into a trap and triggering it is not exactly a foolproof plan on level 10. You'd most likely want to have a Rogue-type in the front who finds said trap and warns party of it, allowing you to either circumvent or if worst comes to worst, disarm it. Simulacrums, Summons & co. all provide equally unpleasant surprises.

A simple Alarm in e.g. a Kobold lair (or hell, Dragon's lair) is something you absolutely don't want to trigger. Fighting a whole dungeon at once is very different from taking the opposition out one by one even in traditional dungeons. And that's a very low CR trap. It's just...facechecking traps is not a good idea. It just isn't. Too many things can go wrong. There are too many types of traps you don't want to trigger to ever make the risk worth it.

[TOZ]

Apologies, Wholeness of Body was a typo.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

Poor Tank? Well, against who [sic], precisely?

Anyone/Anything. Middling hit dice (and lower Con due to MAD), low AC (despite all his class features, and with lower Wis and Dex due to MAD), no means of mitigating damage - all of these lead to poor tanking.


If your foe is a Wizard, for example, and he's chucking lightning bolts/fireballs/etc etc

If your foe is a Wizard, for example, he'll be chucking no save/no SR orbs of Force at you.


your fighter won't last especially long unless he's been buffed specifically against that particular damage type.

And neither will your Monk - the aforementioned middling hit dice and MAD problems mean that the Monk is worse off at defending against the sorts of attacks a Wizard will be throwing around.


Your Monk can not only survive such a barrage but can get in quick and introduce our Spell casting friend to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, removing that threat with a prejudice... especially in comparison to your normal fighter.

How, exactly? In your original example, you suggest spells which have "Save for Half" or whatever, but I frankly disagree with the assumption that those sorts of spells will see use. And how will the speedy Monk "get in quick" when the mage in question is Flying/Astrally Projecting/Invisible/Incorporeal? And what if the mage is immune to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm (immunity to Stun is fairly easy to come by, as is Death). Additionally, a charging fighter (Power Attack, Leap Attack, Battle Jump if you want to get real crazy, and Shock Trooper) can leap in and attack the mage just as easily (if not more easily) than our Monk here, and is likely to deal sufficient damage to end the Wizard (or at least make him take pause/disengage).


Your monk is better able to dodge touch attacks, rays, etc etc... Your fighter? Not so much.

I would be interested to hear the justification for this statement.


God help your fighter if he finds himself in an anti-magic field or the target of a dispel.

Your Monk's Quivering Palm is useless in an AMF. A Wizard casts Invoke Magic, a Cleric is an Initiate of Mystra. They carry on doing what they do,


Opportunist? See Quivering palm/Stunning Fist.

A Monk, due to MAD is unlikely to have sufficient Dex to adequately fuel Combat Reflexes, and insufficient AC to make Karmic Strike/Robilar's Gambit a sensible option.


And you don't even need a flanker. This also lends somewhat to battlefield control.. as being able to completely remove a target from the fight at will with a single strike is something I don't believe any other melee character has. Even the assassin must wait several rounds to do so.

A Fighter/Barbarian with pounce and the aforementioned charging feats can move and full attack, and any and all of the attacks she makes are likely to deal more damage than a Monk could with an entire flurry of blows. No preparation is necessary for this tactic, beyond having some means to charge.


As for face man... the Monk gets both Diplomacy and Sense Motive, something only the Paladin shares amongst characters that are primarily melee.

A Bard has better social skills and with properly optimized Bardic Music and gear choices does better at mêlée than either the Monk or Paladin.


Scout: I see absolutely no reason why the Monk cannot make an excellent scout. He can't disarm traps but neither can the Ranger.

A Ranger can get trapfinding, and a Swift Hunter (a popular Ranger build) has it by default. A Monk has no way of getting it. A monk (again, due to MAD) doesn't have sufficient Dex to be a true sneak, and likely has only a decent Wis which makes him no better at perception than the Ranger (who also is likely to have a decent Wis).

As to the issue of "not consuming party resources", again, I find I disagree with some of your base assumptions. The Monk is going to require equal if not greater buffing than, say, a Fighter, and provides significantly lower damage potential than said Fighter. A Monk doesn't provide adequate skills to cover a skill monkey role, nor does the Monk make a particularly good scout. The Monk also provides no spellcasting. In all, the Monk is using party resources inefficiently, and providing little benefit to boot. Given that, I believe that a Monk doesn't work as a fifth man, or at least not nearly as well as you say.

[Psyren]

Another huge disadvantage of "facechecking" is that it only reveals proximity or touch traps. If the monk is sneaking by he might never trigger an audible/visual trigger trap, and lacking trapfinding think the corridor is clear, fouling up the entire party once they clomp through the area.

This goes double for magic traps, which can trigger off all kinds of attributes (like race or alignment.) Meanwhile the rogue and ranger will be able to spot these even if they are unable to trigger them, and give the party adequate warning.

For the specific examples:


Pit trap = Slow Fall.

Does little for the spikes (and nothing for the acid) at the bottom.


Fireball trap = Evasion/Imp Evasion.

Will stop neither the flash of fire nor the "low roar" which can alert nearby enemies and defeat the point of the monk's stealth.


Arrow Trap = Deflect Arrows.

Stops one arrow/round, whereas arrow traps get multiple attacks dependent on BAB.


Disease/Poison = Diamond/Wholeness of Body.

1) You meant Purity of Body/Diamond Body here.
2) Monks have to wait until level 5/11 respectively for these immunities. The party will likely need a trapfinder before this, especially at low levels when traps are more lethal.


Crushing Ceiling = Abundant Step/Empty Body.

Both are standard actions and therefore too late.


Magical Death Trap = Diamond Soul.

This does work, but magic traps exist before level 13.


Is it perfect? No. Is it a role? Yes.

Here is an amusing example. Razor-Wire across a hallway is a CR1 trap. 2d6 damage can one-shot our facechecking monk even with a 14 in Con. A DC 22 Search check is very unlikely for him to make. His saving throws and evasion are both useless here, and the trap has a +10 to its attack bonus; even assuming a 14 in Dex and Wis, the wire needs only a 4 or more to hit him, i.e. 80% chance.

[The Glyphstone]

Is it really a point in the class's favor when a 1st-level spell is more effective at its "party role"?

[visigani]

Anyone/Anything. Middling hit dice (and lower Con due to MAD), low AC (despite all his class features, and with lower Wis and Dex due to MAD), no means of mitigating damage - all of these lead to poor tanking.



If your foe is a Wizard, for example, he'll be chucking no save/no SR orbs of Force at you.



And neither will your Monk - the aforementioned middling hit dice and MAD problems mean that the Monk is worse off at defending against the sorts of attacks a Wizard will be throwing around.



How, exactly? In your original example, you suggest spells which have "Save for Half" or whatever, but I frankly disagree with the assumption that those sorts of spells will see use. And how will the speedy Monk "get in quick" when the mage in question is Flying/Astrally Projecting/Invisible/Incorporeal? And what if the mage is immune to Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm (immunity to Stun is fairly easy to come by, as is Death). Additionally, a charging fighter (Power Attack, Leap Attack, Battle Jump if you want to get real crazy, and Shock Trooper) can leap in and attack the mage just as easily (if not more easily) than our Monk here, and is likely to deal sufficient damage to end the Wizard (or at least make him take pause/disengage).



I would be interested to hear the justification for this statement.



Your Monk's Quivering Palm is useless in an AMF. A Wizard casts Invoke Magic, a Cleric is an Initiate of Mystra. They carry on doing what they do,



A Monk, due to MAD is unlikely to have sufficient Dex to adequately fuel Combat Reflexes, and insufficient AC to make Karmic Strike/Robilar's Gambit a sensible option.



A Fighter/Barbarian with pounce and the aforementioned charging feats can move and full attack, and any and all of the attacks she makes are likely to deal more damage than a Monk could with an entire flurry of blows. No preparation is necessary for this tactic, beyond having some means to charge.



A Bard has better social skills and with properly optimized Bardic Music and gear choices does better at mêlée than either the Monk or Paladin.



A Ranger can get trapfinding, and a Swift Hunter (a popular Ranger build) has it by default. A Monk has no way of getting it. A monk (again, due to MAD) doesn't have sufficient Dex to be a true sneak, and likely has only a decent Wis which makes him no better at perception than the Ranger (who also is likely to have a decent Wis).

As to the issue of "not consuming party resources", again, I find I disagree with some of your base assumptions. The Monk is going to require equal if not greater buffing than, say, a Fighter, and provides significantly lower damage potential than said Fighter. A Monk doesn't provide adequate skills to cover a skill monkey role, nor does the Monk make a particularly good scout. The Monk also provides no spellcasting. In all, the Monk is using party resources inefficiently, and providing little benefit to boot. Given that, I believe that a Monk doesn't work as a fifth man, or at least not nearly as well as you say.



And it blows me away that people are missing this. You're choosing the most optimized situations AGAINST the monk.

Will every single Wizard on the Face of the Planet have Orbs of Force (which incidentally requires a ranged touch attack to hit, something against the Monk excels, far and away superior to the Fighter).


it goes on down the line... you compare a monk vs. an optimized fighter... you compare a monk against an optimized Wizard.


You say a Monk's quivering palm ise useless in an anti magic field when I specifically suggested using it against a Wizard... who is relatively unlikely to be sitting in the middle of an anti magic field...



{Scrubbed}

My contention was that Monks make good fifth men because they do not consume resources while being able to slip into a variety of roles relatively easily.

You're then saying they are TERRIBAD ZO MAI GAWD because they don't compare to the AC of an Optimized Fighter?

How is that Monk's AC when compared to a dual wielding strength based Ranger... who is also a Melee Combatant... but cannot slide into the "face" roll, would be roughly on par in terms of scouting, has poorer saves, etc etc...


{Scrubbed}

Consider a Balor, a CR 20 creature. A level 20 Monk, naked as the day he was born, and a sword and board fighter in plate with heavy shield. Both without magical items.

Against that balor that Fighter is completely defenseless. He'll fail virtually any save he has to make against that balor. The Monk has a fighting chance to at least be able to get the hell out of town. The Fighter is so much charred offal at this point.

A Cleric that doesn't have to cast Spell Resistance on the Monk, or heal on the Monk, or a host of other spells on the monk can use those spells slots for for other things.


{Scrubbed}

When the fact is the Monk is actually one of the finer examples of a balanced class in the game.

{Scrubbed}

Consider, if you will, a sixth level Monk and a Sixth level Fighter. After that, if things get skewed... that's a failure of the developers in relation to the Fighter class, or the Wizard Class, or the Druid class... not a failure in relation to the monk class.


{Scrubbed}

Why not just have a party of three Clerics, three Wizards and be done with it at that point?

[El Dorado]

In my experience, a monk tends to more valuable at lower levels, when resources (particularly spells) are limited. Imagine a typical medieval keep: main gate, portcullis, 20 foot high walls, 30 foot towers, guards stationed on the walls and tower. Very old school set up. A low-level party (3rd - 4th level) needs to silence the guards in order gain access to the courtyard and ultimately the castle itself. Ideally, you would have a rogue to climb the walls, and move from guard to guard before they could raise an alarm. However, a monk could perform a similar function. A monk can move from guard to guard more quickly than a rogue, though a rogue has the advantage of sneak attacks. Admittedly, this scenario plays to the monk's class features.

[Talya]

it goes on down the line... you compare a monk vs. an optimized fighter...

No. They don't compare to vs. a normal fighter.

Let's put it another way:

A fighter with 12 dexterity and full plate has 19 AC, without any magic gear or shield or anything.

To hit that same AC, a monk needs 18 wisdom, 18 dexterity, and bracers of armor +1. For simplicity, we'll assume a higher point buy of 32 so the monk can actually get those scores.

Of course, then the monk has nothing left for constitution or strength, so they can't actually hit or take a hit. (A monk starting with 18 wis and 18 dex on a 32 point buy has scores of 8/18/8/8/18/8). The fighter only used 4 points of their 32 point buy to get to 12. They can then have 18 strength and 16 con and still have two points left over for whichever mental score they don't want to dump. (probably wisdom.)

[The Glyphstone]

Great Modthulhu: This thread is only retreading old ground, the same tired steps over and over again. Locked for review, don't keep up hopes for re-opening.