Feats up the whazoo

[marcielle]

Recently heard of the martial monk, where you trade off 1 skill point a level to get access to all fighter bonus feats to choose from for your bonus feats.
Just wondering, would Martial monk 2/Fighter 2/Psychic Warrior16 work well?
Basically you get about 8(up to 11 with racial and flaws) feats by level 6. Assuming you choose good feats, would dumping those 4 levels in tier 5 classes be worth the sheer amounts of feats and the ability to take nearly any meelee feat for them? Would it be better to grab dungeoncrasher? Thoughts and critique welcome.

[vitkiraven]

Why not add the UA generic classes expert and warrior, and have some absolutely stupid effects to choose from?

[marcielle]

Umm, was that a 'No, that's just stupid'?

[Darrin]

Recently heard of the martial monk, where you trade off 1 skill point a level to get access to all fighter bonus feats to choose from for your bonus feats.
Just wondering, would Martial monk 2/Fighter 2/Psychic Warrior16 work well?
Basically you get about 8(up to 11 with racial and flaws) feats by level 6. Assuming you choose good feats, would dumping those 4 levels in tier 5 classes be worth the sheer amounts of feats and the ability to take nearly any meelee feat for them? Would it be better to grab dungeoncrasher? Thoughts and critique welcome.

If two of those feats were Monastic Training (Eberron Campaign Setting) and Tashalatora (Secrets of Sarlona), you'd be fine. Otherwise... since PsyWar can taken psionic feats as well as fighter bonus feats, you'd probably still be OK.

You can get even more feats by adding Swashbuckler 1 (Weapon Finesse), Bear Totem Barbarian 3 (Toughness, Improved Grapple, Great Fortitude), and Ranger 4 (Track, TWF/Rapid Shot, Endurance, Champion of the Wild ACF).

The main problem with adding so many melee feats is you quickly run out of the feats that actually do anything useful, and even the useful ones rarely work well with one another. What good does going into Ranger for TWF or Rapid Shot if you've already got a two-handed weapon + Power Attack + Shock Trooper + Leap Attack? You've got the same problem as a Fighter 20 build: just thinking about getting all those bonus feats sounds so great, but in actual practice the number of feats actually worth taking is an abysmally short list.

[Feytalist]

Hmm. The most feat-heavy build I can think of is the shield basher. The one I made up uses about 11 feats in total. But those need to be picked out, nothing that a few levels of monk or ranger would fix.

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

Note with the way martial monk and the monk bonus feats are worded, you can select ANY fighter feat reguardless if you qualify for it or not.

[marcielle]

THAT was what drew me to this actually. But I guess they have a point. Still 5 skill points to totally ignore prereqs for 2 feats sounds like a good enough deal to me. I was actually hoping to grab Karmic and Robilar for those 2 feats. And Combat reflexes for 1st level. Meaning I hit people twice everytime they hit me. Replace Flurry with the Decisive Strike ACF and you deal 2 times the damage on all attacks until next turn. Essentially meaning you get 4 hits for every one they get on you. 6 at later levels since, with Expansion you'll have reach. Then you use the Psychic Warrior's bonus feats for Monastic and Tash. On one hand, your high base damage will mean most mooks go down the second they hit you. On the other, you are gonna need a buttloadda hp.

[Emmerask]

Note with the way martial monk and the monk bonus feats are worded, you can select ANY fighter feat reguardless if you qualify for it or not.

Hm, would that theoretically also mean that one could chose from the epic fighter feat list? ^^
Exceptional Deflection and Reflect arrows sounds nice for a level 2 character ( ie reflect all direct target spells and arrows back to the attacker)^^

[RndmNumGen]

Where's the Martial Monk from?

[flabort]

Hold on, let me dig an old feat out of my ext. sig.


No, no, no. This is how you pump feats.

Wild Elf Feat Rogue 2/ Fighter 2/ Psychic Warrior 2/ Generic Warrior 2/ Generic Expert 2/ Martial Wizard 1/ Psion 1/ Generic Spellcaster 1/ Cloistered Cleric 1 (with all 3 domains swapped for Devotion feats)/ Monk 2/ Bear Totem Barbarian 3/ Soulknife 1. Make sure you do the Dark Chaos Shuffle.

27 bonus feats. I guess this blows your 6-8 out of the water? :smalltongue:

We've learned how to milk feats pretty efficiently already. Or, other members of the playground have. :smallbiggrin:

[Curmudgeon]

Note with the way martial monk and the monk bonus feats are worded, you can select ANY fighter feat reguardless if you qualify for it or not.
Well, that's a big heap of non sequitur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29).
Bonus Feat: At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.
"These feats" are Improved Grapple, Stunning Fist, Combat Reflexes, Deflect Arrows, Improved Disarm, and Improved Trip. The "need not have any of the prerequisites" statement applies to these six feats. The Martial Monk variant (Dragon # 310, page 45) has no similar statement for the Fighter bonus feats, so the normal rules for feats apply as usual.

[Person_Man]

I too suggest the standard Tashalatora build of Monk 1 or 2/Psychic Warrior 18 or 19. The Fighter levels are a waste, for reasons pointed out by Darrin and others.

I wrote up a fairly extensive melee combo guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127026). But it can basically be boiled down to this; Get a decent damage combo. Then pick one or two status effects for battlefield control (Grapple, Bull Rush, Trip, Daze, etc).

And that's pretty much it. Stacking multiple super damage combos is pointless, because it just forces your DM to make enemies that much tougher. And stacking multiple status effects is usually not worth it. For example, if your enemy is Dazed, it doesn't add much if he's Tripped. If he's Grappled, you can't Bull Rush him. And so on.

Doing so basically takes 4-8ish Feats and/or class levels. Beyond that, you generally want to spend your feats augmenting your psionics (or whatever), because melee Feats by themselves are lead to a dead end.

[Coidzor]

Hold on, let me dig an old feat out of my ext. sig.



27 bonus feats. I guess this blows your 6-8 out of the water? :smalltongue:

We've learned how to milk feats pretty efficiently already. Or, other members of the playground have. :smallbiggrin:

And if you dark chaos truffle shuffle them, you can even do some interesting things with them, though mostly that means adding some minor blade magic, minor soulbinding, and moderate-to sweet meldshaping in addition to being able to do one or two martial shticks, IIRC.

[Calanon]

Hold on, let me dig an old feat out of my ext. sig.


Wild Elf Feat Rogue 2/ Fighter 2/ Psychic Warrior 2/ Generic Warrior 2/ Generic Expert 2/ Martial Wizard 1/ Psion 1/ Generic Spellcaster 1/ Cloistered Cleric 1 (with all 3 domains swapped for Devotion feats)/ Monk 2/ Bear Totem Barbarian 3/ Soulknife 1. Make sure you do the Dark Chaos Shuffle.

27 bonus feats. I guess this blows your 6-8 out of the water? :smalltongue:

We've learned how to milk feats pretty efficiently already. Or, other members of the playground have. :smallbiggrin:

Silly God, when one member of the playground does something, We ALL do it atleast once so in theory you've already invented that build :smallwink:

[Little Brother]

Note with the way martial monk and the monk bonus feats are worded, you can select ANY fighter feat reguardless if you qualify for it or not.Funnily enough, that includes epic fighters. Used to great effect here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187182)


Well, that's a big heap of non sequitur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29).
"These feats" are Improved Grapple, Stunning Fist, Combat Reflexes, Deflect Arrows, Improved Disarm, and Improved Trip. The "need not have any of the prerequisites" statement applies to these six feats. The Martial Monk variant (Dragon # 310, page 45) has no similar statement for the Fighter bonus feats, so the normal rules for feats apply as usual.No, the "need not meet prereqs" is in relation to the heading Bonus Feats. The list is saying what is allowable, the "Need not meet prereqs" is on the subject of the matter, the bonus feats in general.

Compare to Dishes
At for the first course, a guest may select either oysters or hors D'Oeuvres as a dish. For the second course, she may select either Consommé Olga or cream of barley as a dish. For the 6th course, she may select either Chicken Marsala with mushrooms or Lamb with mint sauce as a dish. A guest need not have any of the reservations normally required for these dishes to be served.

And, in addition, a note says: Guests can choose any other dish on our menu, as well

Does that mean you need reservations to eat anything but oyster, cream of barley, and chicken? No, it means that you can ask for anything you please on the menu at that full course meal.

[Curmudgeon]

Compare to Dishes
That example is nonsense, because it's internally inconsistent. There is no reason to stipulate specific choices if there is no requirement to make those choices. As such, it doesn't do anything to clarify this point of contention.

[marcielle]

Well, if we get down to RAW, the actual wording is thus:


Bonus Feat
At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

Now, 'these feats' could apply to bonus feats in general or to the specific feats. Most would assume the later but taking the most obvious assumption is not always a good thing in DnD. Let me remind you of the Dragon Disciple infinite loop... I'd like to think the good people at Dragon Magazine thought ' Hey, the monk really DOES suck' and finally decided to throw them a significant bone.

[Little Brother]

That example is nonsense, because it's internally inconsistent. There is no reason to stipulate specific choices if there is no requirement to make those choices. As such, it doesn't do anything to clarify this point of contention.Sentence structure was the point. Fine, how would you fell if we tacked at 9-10 PM on the beginning of the first one? Same thing.

And how is it inconsistent?

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

What is the exact text of the Martial Monk ability, for those of us who don't have the issue in question handy?

[marcielle]

This is it EXACTLY:

Gain: Fighter bonus feat lest to choose monk bonus feats( at 1st, 2nd and 6th level); Intimidate as class skill.
Lose: -1 skill point per level( and -4 skill points at 1st level); no knowledge skills as class skills.

Another reason NOT to take the most obvious gramatical interpretation. Since the double negative LOSING -1 skill points means you actually GAIN a skill point lol..

[Urpriest]

This is it EXACTLY:


Another reason NOT to take the most obvious gramatical interpretation. Since the double negative LOSING -1 skill points means you actually GAIN a skill point lol.

It's actually lest rather than list?

[Emmerask]

Since you ignore prereqs for every single one of the monk bonus feats and the text just says that you add fighter bonus feats to the bonus feat list it is reasonable to assume that then you ignore their prereqs too.

these is fairly ambiguous in english (afaik its not my native tongue) and can either be specific or unspecific "on these terms" would be specific terms but "one of these days" would be someday ie unspecific^^

So it can either mean "those that are on the bonus list" or "those that we have enumerated previously". So if there is no errata raw is not clear on that matter.

Seeing that we are talking about t5 here as a dm I would be perfectly willing to allow it as any feat on the bonus list is taken without prereqs even if you manage to expand that list.

[Urpriest]

Seeing that we are talking about t5 here as a dm I would be perfectly willing to allow it as any feat on the bonus list is taken without prereqs even if you manage to expand that list.

Even epic feats?

[Emmerask]

They are technically not on the fighter bonus feat list but on the epic fighter bonus feat list ^^

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

They are technically not on the fighter bonus feat list but on the epic fighter bonus feat list ^^

Very true.


Gain: Fighter bonus feat list to choose monk bonus feats( at 1st, 2nd and 6th level); Intimidate as class skill.
Lose: -1 skill point per level( and -4 skill points at 1st level); no knowledge skills as class skills.

Well, the first and more important thing to realize is that Dragon isn't, strictly speaking, RAW, as it's all extremely optional material (and often poorly balanced and/or not playtested). As such, things that are hastily written (like this) need to be considered.

My instinct is to say that these bonus feats would follow the normal requirements for Fighter bonus feats: A fighter must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.

Going strictly by the writing, yes...you could argue either for or against the prerequisites, depending on how you interpret the "these feats" line of the Monk's ability in light of new additions to the feat list (either "these" refers to all bonus feats, or exclusively to the ones mentioned in the ability). Either interpretation is equally valid, so in that case I tend to side with the one that the DM is most likely to take...thus, I'd say you do need to meet the requirements for the bonus fighter feats. Another good reason is that, by going strictly by the writing, you're actually gaining skill points (as mentioned by a previous poster). That implies that the ability is not well-written nor meant to be taken strictly literally.

[Necroticplague]

Don't forget to visit a utygoh hole and worship an elder evil.

[Curmudgeon]

Well, the first and more important thing to realize is that Dragon isn't, strictly speaking, RAW, as it's all extremely optional material
Wizards of the Coast disagrees with you. Each issue of Dragon magazine during the D&D 3.x era, whether published by Wizards of the Coast or under license by Paizo Publishing, had the official D&D logo on the cover:


http://www.hitpointe.com/kenzer/pics/3elogo.gif

usually with a banner like "100% OFFICIAL CONTENT". Inside the cover you'll find a notice like:
Trademarks related to the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS brand, including DRAGON, DUNGEON, and D&D are used under license from Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a division of Hasbro, Inc.
D&D content published in Dragon is just as official as in a supplement like Complete Arcane, and both are equally optional.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Wizards of the Coast disagrees with you. Each issue of Dragon magazine during the D&D 3.x era, whether published by Wizards of the Coast or under license by Paizo Publishing, had the official D&D logo on the cover:

usually with a banner like "100% OFFICIAL CONTENT". Inside the cover you'll find a notice like:
D&D content published in Dragon is just as official as in a supplement like Complete Arcane, and both are equally optional.

Ah. I have been proven incorrect. :smallbiggrin:

[marcielle]

Besides, you really gonna argue about balance in DnD? The game the creators made unbalanced ON PURPOSE? No, really. Apparently in some interview, one of the creators mentioned that things like toughness exist because they wanted to reward players for minmaxing on the basis they were working harder at the game.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Besides, you really gonna argue about balance in DnD? The game the creators made unbalanced ON PURPOSE? No, really. Apparently in some interview, one of the creators mentioned that things like toughness exist because they wanted to reward players for minmaxing on the basis they were working harder at the game.

Yes. That said, I will still argue about balance in D&D because, as a rather prolific homebrewer, I know it can be accomplished within reasonable boundaries (clearly making a Fighter that's up to par with the Wizard is nigh impossible, but you can balance many aspects of the game fairly well). :smallbiggrin: