replacing monk

[geonova]

i'm starting up a campaign with a group of new players, but i don't want to not use monk in my campaign (both because it is thematically inappropriate and also horribly under-powered), what would be a good class to use instead?

i'm looking for a tier 2 or 3 class that doesn't add any abilities that are too confusing for new players, which means no psionics, incarnum or ToB.

[Studoku]

If you think it's thematically inappropriate, why do you need a replacement for it?

[BowStreetRunner]

I guess it depends on what classes you are already using. Factotum might be a good replacement. But rather than looking at it from the perspective of replacing monk, you might do better to just come up with a list of the classes you are currently using and ask whether that is a good enough list to offer players the options they need.

[geonova]

i want to keep the same amount of classes, but i can't think of a non-core class that would be easy for beginners to use

[Alex12]

Here's the thing to remember about the Tier system. It assumes optimization. If these players are new, and not really optimizing heavily, the Monk actually isn't terrible, at least at low levels. For that matter, if they're capable of understanding Vancian magic, then a lot of the other systems (psionics and ToB especially, IMO) are actually easier to understand. Most of the Tier 2-3s are either things you've already got, things you explicitly disallowed, or are actually complex enough that I'd hesitate at having a newbie play (Factotum is cool, but not exactly newbie-friendly)


It depends largely on what you want the new class to do.
If you're trying to replace the Monk thematically, then my initial feeling is swordsage. But that's ToB, which you disallowed, plus you said it didn't work thematically.
For an easy class that still feels useful, it's pretty hard to beat Warlock (Complete Arcane) or Dragonfire Adept (Dragon Magic)
For a class based on combat, soulknife (psionic, but doesn't use powers or anything) houseruled to give them the full BAB progression they should have gotten from the start is a tolerable thing.
Really, just look here. http://www.brilliantgameologists.com/boards/?topic=1002.0

[Studoku]

Favored Soul might be worth looking at if you want to add another class because you think having a slightly different number of base classes will ruin the game.

It is to a Cleric what a Sorcerer is to a Wizard and it works well as a newbie-friendly cleric since they don't have to prepare spells from an entire list.

Is there a particular aspect of the monk that you feel needs to be available?

[Fouredged Sword]

I am in favor of renaming the Archivist as Monk and calling it more appropriate for the era we are supposed to be copying.

[BowStreetRunner]

There are 11 base classes in PHB. Four of them are primary combat types (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger), four are primary caster types (Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard) and three are skillful types (Bard, Monk, Rogue), and that is classifying them very loosely.

If you are using any other base classes from other sources, of course the balance of options is going to be different. But without any information from you on what you are using, I'm just going to assume the starting 11.

Since Monk really isn't a primary combat type and definitely isn't a primary caster type, you could really use more options for the skillful player. Scout and/or Factotum would be your best bet.

[SolioFebalas]

Duskbladde (Tier 2) - simple enough, Hexblade, Marshal (Tier 4) and maybe Battle Dancer - not so simple (like monk but different).

[geonova]

what book is duskblade in?

[Studoku]

what book is duskblade in?
Player's Handbook II

[Psyren]

i'm looking for a tier 2 or 3 class


I am in favor of renaming the Archivist as Monk

What

Anyway, the trouble with what you're asking is that T3+ classes get that way by having a lot of good options - that is precisely what makes them strong enough to be T3 and above, and simultaneously it's what makes them harder for beginners to use. I'd say the simplest T3 class is DFA, but I don't know if it will fit into your campaign concept.

[Telonius]

Easy-to-use, tier 2 or 3, none of the spiffy subsystems ...

Warlock is technically rated as Tier 4, but (imo) it's a high Tier 4. Also (again, imo) really, really fun to play.

[Humble Master]

I recommend anything from Tome of Battle: Crusader, Swordsage or Warblade. All are tier 3 and are rather easy to use.

[warmachine]

Monk has no definable in-game role and is thematically inappropriate. It's absence doesn't seem to be a problem. The OP needs to state what gameplay and/or story role he thinks is missing? Thief? Scout? Kung fu hijinks? Mysterious, mystical tricks?

[elvengunner69]

Dragon Shaman is a fun class to play -- pretty easy and can fill a couple of roles (buffer, melee & little healing). I have no idea what tier it is to be honest as there are better classes that do those things but it is still a nice class as long as players aren't looking for ultimate optimization.

[Psyren]

Dragon Shaman is a fun class to play -- pretty easy and can fill a couple of roles (buffer, melee & little healing). I have no idea what tier it is to be honest as there are better classes that do those things but it is still a nice class as long as players aren't looking for ultimate optimization.

Dragon Shaman is T4. The auras are a bit too passive and the breath weapon's cooldown effectively makes it an encounter power. But it can hold its own in a medium power campaign.

[Norin]

Never really understood why punching people in the face was considered unthematic. :smalltongue:

On a more serious note, it's thematic role is purely based on the setting you play in. That's my opinion.

Example: A Shou monk in Forgotten Realms is not unthematic at all.

[JusticeZero]

i'm starting up a campaign with a group of new players, but i don't want to not use monk in my campaign (both because it is thematically inappropriate and also horribly under-powered), what would be a good class to use instead?

i'm looking for a tier 2 or 3 class that doesn't add any abilities that are too confusing for new players, which means no psionics, incarnum or ToB.
Soulknife and Aegis. They're located in the psionics stuff on the pathfinder site, but are not themselves psionic. Soulknife conjures up a weapon (or enhanced fists or whatever); Aegis conjures up a combat form/armor.
That said, psionics are not any more complicated than vancian; it's a simple system that just happens to be different from the other one. Psionic Warrior would work too as a result.

[Seerow]

Duskbladde (Tier 2) - simple enough, Hexblade, Marshal (Tier 4) and maybe Battle Dancer - not so simple (like monk but different).

Since when is Duskblade considered Tier2? Last time I checked it was Tier 4. Maybe the very low end of tier 3.

[zilonox]

I know the OP said no psionics, but I wanted to echo the sentiments of several others that have posted already.

I think the psychic warrior would be a good replacement for the monk. It has limited power points and limited power selection, but good utility. And psionics are really no more complicated than vancian magic. Below is a very basic comparison of the two systems.


Magic: I know x many spells and can cast y many of them per day (and forget them after I cast them). I can boost my spells through meta-magic, but cannot boost any spell above my caster level.


Psionics: I know x many powers and I have y many power points (powers cost z many points each to manifest). I can boost some of my powers, but cannot spend more points than my manifester level on any power.

I feel they're very similar when you strip off the fluff and look at the mechanics.

[Gavinfoxx]

Why don't you use these classes entirely?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174628

[Urpriest]

In general, ToB classes are easier for new players to learn than Core Melee. New players often are coming in from a video-game background, where characters have certain abilities that they can activate on a cooldown. Rather than having to remember when you can full attack and when you can't, classes like the ToB classes with a set of specific powers that can be put on cards put all the information in front of them in an easily manipulated way. It's one of the reasons 4e uses those design principles. So I'd think that a Swordsage would be much easier for new players than a Monk.

[Ruethgar]

Please correct the double negative in the OP, it is screaming at me.

If they are new players might I suggest just going with the Generic classes from Unerthed Arcana. Of course with the slight tweak of choosing either the cleric spell list or the sorcerer list for Spellcaster instead of both.

If you want to keep the original number of classes just minus the monk, I would probably take one of the suggestions above.

[TrollCapAmerica]

Hmm well if you want something simple for new players I think Favored Soul might fit.Its going to mirror the Sorc/Wiz relationship when it comes to casting and will probably look like it fits better than Monk does to new players because of that

Warlock is also good simple and gives magic abilties without worrying about Vancian magic.New players might like the blatiness if they are more used to video game RPGs

I could also recommend Wu Jen if you wanna replace Monk with another Oriental themed class.Its a tier 2 caster without being too complex and doesnt do anything that game breaking

[Flickerdart]

Why do you want a Monk replacement? What niche does the Monk fill that none of the other 10 base Core classes can do better?

[Urpriest]

Please correct the double negative in the OP, it is screaming at me.

If they are new players might I suggest just going with the Generic classes from Unerthed Arcana. Of course with the slight tweak of choosing either the cleric spell list or the sorcerer list for Spellcaster instead of both.

If you want to keep the original number of classes just minus the monk, I would probably take one of the suggestions above.

Why do the Generic classes help things? They've got more choices and more wide-ranging capabilities.

Generic Classes, like Fighters, are way too complicated for new players. They're built to have lots of fiddly options that you need system mastery to properly use.

[pilvento]

Want to "replace it" so they have the same amount of choices? Give them Scout from Comp Adventurer.

In my group, Monk gets Full bab, and thats it.

Alternate Class features from SRD are nice, we are 5 players + DM and we allways have a Monk like character arround.

[JusticeZero]

Have to agree with needing to know why you NEED the monk. I've done things that involve banning half of the CRB classes without replacement before without blinking and without it causing any problems. Removing choices that do not fit in a campaign setting is something that should be done without reservation and mercilessly as needed. They don't NEED a wide menu of choices that fit the game poorly; they NEED a selection of flavorful choices that fit the setting. That selection can be small. You can have a game where the only spellcasters are clerics and paladins, for instance, or even restrict it to only druids and rangers. (and maybe bards, in keeping with the 1e feel). You can ban fighters if you really feel like it. It won't really matter any, other than making your job as a GM easier.

[SowZ]

Alternatively, just tell them to play a City Brawler Barbarian and refluff the rage as some sort of meditative combat trance.

[molten_dragon]

i want to keep the same amount of classes, but i can't think of a non-core class that would be easy for beginners to use

Any of the limited-list casters (i.e. warmage, dread necromancer, or beguiler) would be pretty easy for a new player to use. They cast spontaneously, and they don't have to worry about picking spells since they get their whole list.

[Alex12]

Any of the limited-list casters (i.e. warmage, dread necromancer, or beguiler) would be pretty easy for a new player to use. They cast spontaneously, and they don't have to worry about picking spells since they get their whole list.

Assuming you're not playing an evil campaign, or are willing to rip out decent chunks of the alignment system, dread necromancer probably isn't a good idea. It's possible to play a good DN, it's just hard, what with the "hordes of undead" thing.

[Flickerdart]

Dread Necromancers don't need to have even a single undead if they don't want to. They have an impressive stack of debuff spells to sling around. The Lich transformation at level 20 is a little more difficult to explain to your paladin friend though.

[Alex12]

Dread Necromancers don't need to have even a single undead if they don't want to. They have an impressive stack of debuff spells to sling around. The Lich transformation at level 20 is a little more difficult to explain to your paladin friend though.

If you're one of the non-Humanoid races, it doesn't happen. Aberration like Elan or Synad, Monstrous Humanoid like Goliath, Undead already like Necropolitan (may be similarly difficult to explain, and also kind of nonsensical), just off the top of my head.

[137beth]

Here's the thing to remember about the Tier system. It assumes optimization.
no! In fact, at high optimization levels almost every class in the tier system is misplaced. The tier system does not assume any sort of optimization. It does assume that players have similar skill levels, so if all the players are beginners, then it is still relevant.

Have you considered adding the Magus? It has the upshot of not needing any physical out-of-print books that new players may not have (all the Magus stats and resources are OGL and available at the pfsrd.) It is high tier 3-low tier 2, which fits your requested power level. It doesn't use any complex subsystems that you don't already have in core.

[Rubik]

no! In fact, at high optimization levels almost every class in the tier system is misplaced. The tier system does not assume any sort of optimization. It does assume that players have similar skill levels, so if all the players are beginners, then it is still relevant.It does assume absolute minimal levels, though. As in, you don't throw darts at the dartboard and instead pick things that are somewhat vaguely relevant to the class in question. That is, barbarians aren't picking metamagic feats, or whatever.

But that's just common sense.

But even if you don't? The higher tiers can recover from being built completely randomly if the player finds a degree of competence. Let's say a wizard with nothing but +2/+2 skill feats and Toughness, while taking the worst spells possible, suddenly realizes what spells are good ones and starts spending his money on those, instead. Yes, you still have cruddy feats, but new spells can make all the difference. You can break the game a thousand different ways with nothing but +2/+2 skill feats and Toughness.

The lesser tiers just can't do that.

[SowZ]

It does assume absolute minimal levels, though. As in, you don't throw darts at the dartboard and instead pick things that are somewhat vaguely relevant to the class in question. That is, barbarians aren't picking metamagic feats, or whatever.

But that's just common sense.

But even if you don't? The higher tiers can recover from being built completely randomly if the player finds a degree of competence. Let's say a wizard with nothing but +2/+2 skill feats and Toughness, while taking the worst spells possible, suddenly realizes what spells are good ones and starts spending his money on those, instead. Yes, you still have cruddy feats, but new spells can make all the difference. You can break the game a thousand different ways with nothing but +2/+2 skill feats and Toughness.

The lesser tiers just can't do that.

Even at stupid low optimization, the tier system still works. A Wizard who only takes skill feats and chooses to put strength at 18 and Int at 14 will be better than the Fighter who pimps out all his mental stats leaving a Str and Dex of 12 and chooses totally irrelevant feats.

[Reprimand]

i'm starting up a campaign with a group of new players, but i don't want to not use monk in my campaign (both because it is thematically inappropriate and also horribly under-powered), what would be a good class to use instead?

i'm looking for a tier 2 or 3 class that doesn't add any abilities that are too confusing for new players, which means no psionics, incarnum or ToB.

You could just try reflavoring it like someone who's really good at parkour and kung fu or something. Even just replacing ki based abilties with a more mundane explanation. It's all in the delivery not just RAW.

Ultimately your choice though.

[Eldariel]

Monk is basically just a mystical martial artist. Cleric can do the same, and Duskblade can work too. Duskblade is a pretty solid Tier 3 class, and does the magical warrior thingy pretty well.

None of this does martial arts inherently, but you can port over Tome of Battle-feat "Superior Unarmed Strikes" (basically gives you Monk-like scaling unarmed damage) and allow any class with martial weapon proficiencies to trade their martial weapon proficiencies for Improved Unarmed Strike, Superior Unarmed Strike (or hell, Monk Unarmed Damage progression; that would probably be better) and Monk-proficiencies (if desired).

This way Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Duskblade & Paladin could all go unarmed warrior if desired. You could also give it to Clerics with War-domain and a deity with favored Unarmed Strikes. Perhaps a specific clerical order for the Shaolin-style Monks or whatever.


This system is probably far superior to the inherent system anyways; having Unarmed Strikes be inefficient unless you have 20 levels in the Monk-class is kinda silly. Why can't Barb or Fighter study unarmed combat?