D&D 3.5 Core Monk Build Advice

[BrotherSilence]

My DM allowed my to switch to a monk since I've always wanted to try one out and i think they will be a lot of fun. as of now we are lvl 6 and my stats are as follows
Str: 18
Dex: 16
Con: 16
Int: 16
Wis: 20
Cha: 10
the reason my stats are so high is because our DM runs a fairly high powered campaign, like we last fought a CR 8 athach and after that fought 6 lvl 5 Half-orc fighters, we typically have some rough fights. anyways i would love advice on how to play him to his full potential and further build him down the road. the feats i currently have are Improved initiative/unarmed attack/grapple/trip/dodge/stunning fist/ Weapon focus unarmed. it might be important to note my DM doesn't allow improved natural weapon and is very hesitant about AoOs, though he might incorporate them a bit. any advice on how i can develop him or play him effectively is much appreciated.

[Curmudgeon]

Pure Monk, core only, but excluding Improved Natural Attack (unarmed strike)? You pretty much can't play this character effectively. Your best bet is to get party spellcasters to buff you with every spell that can possibly help you, and hope you get lucky.

[Flickerdart]

No AoOs? Yep, you're not gonna get out of this one well - the main advantage of Trip is that enemies provoke when they stand up, and monks are halfway decent at harassing low-op casters who don't know what casting defensively is and provoke when they cast. AoOs would also have let you delay for a round in combat (or drink a potion or something) to let your competent melee friends engage the nastiest enemies and then run around them to hit a squishy in the rear. Without AoOs the nasties can disengage your front line and crush your tiny monk spine.

[sideswipe]

beg your DM to let you use a couple bits from other books. decisive strike or invisible fist. passive way monk. something.

[Doctor Awkward]

Agreed.

A Core-Only monks full potential sucks. I mean, it does depend on what the other party is playing, but a rogue or a barbarian that knows what they are doing will outshine you pretty much all of the time.

There's was an old saying back on the 339 boards about monks:

Monk is a three level class.
Those levels are 1, 2, and 6.
If you are playing a build with monk levels in a high-op game and you have levels other than those, you are doing it wrong.

I mean, if you were the only one in your party that had stats like that, and everyone else was 28 point buy, you'd be in okay shape. But if everyone has stats like that, oy.

[Troacctid]

By level 6, your glory days are past. You will only get weaker (relative to the expected power for your level) from here. My advice is to multiclass out of Monk starting now. 6th level is a good break point--you've gotten all your bonus feats and your core class features, and your next level is dead, so you have little to lose by switching classes now.

Rogue would be a good option to expand your out-of-combat versatility with more skill points (while also getting a bit of extra damage with the occasional sneak attack). You could then prestige into Assassin to get some spellcasting. Similarly, Ranger could offer you some more skill points and BAB while opening up Horizon Walker as a prestige option. You could also jump into Cleric or Druid with your high Wisdom score--yes, you'd be behind on your casting, but better late than never--you're still going to be ahead compared to a Ranger or Paladin, and it's still 3/4 BAB, same as Monk, so it's not like you're losing out on anything.

[prufock]

Core only? Hmm.

Ditch Dodge and grab Ability Focus (Stunning Fist) to increase the DC by 2. You have 6 per day, so at the very least you can try to stunlock some enemies. Get a monk's belt when you can afford it (maybe level 8), but for now get a periapt of wisdom to increase the DC as well.

I'm going to suggest something unusual here, since you're playing core-only and want to be a monk: Dragon Disciple (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/dragonDisciple.htm). You can get your first level by 6 if you change up some feats. You need a one-level dip in sorcerer. You still don't care too much about spellcasting, but it would be nice if you could get your Cha up to 11 so you can cast 1st-level spells at least. Monk 4/Sorc 1/DD 10 is respectable.

What's nice about this option is the second level of DD. You get 2 claws and a bite as natural weapons. You can use these in conjunction with your flurry, treating the natural weapons as secondary attacks. So, for instance, you get 2 attacks from the flurry, then 2 claws and a bite attack on a full attack action. The claws and bite are at your highest base attack bonus minus 5. So let's say you have BAB +3, Weapon Focus, and 18 strength. You flurry at +6/+6, then 2 claws and a bite at +2 each. You will want the Multiattack feat to reduce your natural weapon penalty to -2 instead of -5, and later Improved Multiattack to remove the penalty altogether.

This also gets you blindsight, good ability score increases, natural armor, and eventually wings.

Note: Having 3 natural attacks now (including unarmed strike) makes an amulet of mighty fists more palatable for the price. I know it's core only, but see if your DM will allow a +wis bonus on that item without paying 50% more for the add-on. This rule is covered in the Magic Item Compendium. In core you have to pay 50% extra for the less expensive piece.

[Flickerdart]

I'm going to suggest something unusual here, since you're playing core-only and want to be a monk: Dragon Disciple (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/dragonDisciple.htm). You can get your first level by 6 if you change up some feats. You need a one-level dip in sorcerer. You still don't care too much about spellcasting, but it would be nice if you could get your Cha up to 11 so you can cast 1st-level spells at least. Monk 4/Sorc 1/DD 10 is respectable.

Why not Bard? Better HD, better skills, and weapon/armor proficiencies (though those don't help you much). The only way bards aren't straight up better is when weighing Familiar vs low-level bard songs - which one is more useless is hard to say.

[Karl Aegis]

What's nice about this option is the second level of DD. You get 2 claws and a bite as natural weapons. You can use these in conjunction with your flurry, treating the natural weapons as secondary attacks. So, for instance, you get 2 attacks from the flurry, then 2 claws and a bite attack on a full attack action. The claws and bite are at your highest base attack bonus minus 5. So let's say you have BAB +3, Weapon Focus, and 18 strength. You flurry at +6/+6, then 2 claws and a bite at +2 each. You will want the Multiattack feat to reduce your natural weapon penalty to -2 instead of -5, and later Improved Multiattack to remove the penalty altogether.


Core Monks can not make 2 full attack actions in a turn. Claw and bite attacks are not monk weapons. They can not be used in a flurry. I don't know why so many people think monks can use more than one full attack action in a turn, but it needs to stop.

[Troacctid]

Why not Bard? Better HD, better skills, and weapon/armor proficiencies (though those don't help you much). The only way bards aren't straight up better is when weighing Familiar vs low-level bard songs - which one is more useless is hard to say.

Bards don't get 1st level spells at level 1 in 3.5.

[Flickerdart]

Bards don't get 1st level spells at level 1 in 3.5.
Dragon Disciple doesn't require 1st level spells in 3.5. You may be thinking of Arcane Archer.

[Darrin]

Core Monks can not make 2 full attack actions in a turn. Claw and bite attacks are not monk weapons. They can not be used in a flurry. I don't know why so many people think monks can use more than one full attack action in a turn, but it needs to stop.

There's only one full attack here. The natural weapons are being added as secondary attacks after the Flurry. There's an argument that so long as the natural attacks aren't used in the Flurry attacks, then they can still be used after the Flurry. The rules for Flurry aren't explicit enough to say that any additional attacks after the Flurry that don't involve monk weapons can't be made. The Flurry rules are... pretty vague. This is more of a DM's Call, really... but if this is a Core Monk, then it's probably worth it to rule in the Monk's favor in this case (probably won't help, but it's not going to hurt anything).

[prufock]

Why not Bard? Better HD, better skills, and weapon/armor proficiencies (though those don't help you much). The only way bards aren't straight up better is when weighing Familiar vs low-level bard songs - which one is more useless is hard to say.
Very good point. Inspire Courage at least can give you that +1 boost, which is nice. Sorcs win out on spells though, if you get your cha to 11. Either would be viable, I think.


Core Monks can not make 2 full attack actions in a turn. Claw and bite attacks are not monk weapons. They can not be used in a flurry. I don't know why so many people think monks can use more than one full attack action in a turn, but it needs to stop.
You are misunderstanding the attack routine.


Some creatures combine attacks with natural and manufactured weapons when they make a full attack. When they do so, the manufactured weapon attack is considered the primary attack unless the creature’s description indicates otherwise and any natural weapons the creature also uses are considered secondary natural attacks. These secondary attacks do not interfere with the primary attack as attacking with an off-hand weapon does, but they take the usual -5 penalty (or -2 with the Multiattack feat) for such attacks, even if the natural weapon used is normally the creature’s primary natural weapon.
The monk's unarmed strike takes the place of the manufactured weapon attack in this instance. When you full attack, you get your unarmed strike plus any natural weapons as secondary attacks. The secondary attacks don't interfere with your primary attack routine, they are in addition to it.

Fist (primary)/Fist (primary, flurry)/Claw (secondary)/Claw (secondary)/Bite (secondary)

[Troacctid]

Dragon Disciple doesn't require 1st level spells in 3.5. You may be thinking of Arcane Archer.

I know, I meant that's why Sorcerer is better than Bard. You get 1st level spells instead of just cantrips. Better options.

Not that it matters to a character with 10 Charisma, I guess, since you only get the cantrips either way.

[Darrin]

The monk's unarmed strike takes the place of the manufactured weapon attack in this instance. When you full attack, you get your unarmed strike plus any natural weapons as secondary attacks. The secondary attacks don't interfere with your primary attack routine, they are in addition to it.

The point of contention is this line here from the PHB:

"When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham)."

It's ambiguous what "using flurry of blows" means. It could mean:

A) When you use Flurry, only your Flurry attacks must be monk weapons.

B) When you use Flurry during your turn, all your attacks for that turn must be monk weapons.

The RAW is murky here, and the FAQ doesn't have anything definitive, so you're at the mercy of "Ask the DM".

[Curmudgeon]

There's only one full attack here. The natural weapons are being added as secondary attacks after the Flurry.
That's only an option with BAB of +5 or less. Both of those types of attacks are part of a full attack action. That action includes the following rule:
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. The BAB is the enabling condition for the rule, but it affects all attacks in a full attack regardless of whether they're iterative attacks. So you're recommending a combat stratagem that's guaranteed to break as the character advances.

The character is already Monk 6 (BAB +4). Bard 1/Dragon Disciple 2 adds +1 to BAB. So this attack option requires 3 additional character levels to attain, but then is only legal for a single level: one extra level in any of Monk or Dragon Disciple or Bard causes it to break because you would have to intersperse all attacks in order of decreasing BAB, and a Monk can’t use any weapon other than a special Monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows.

[Flickerdart]

That action includes the following rule: The BAB is the enabling condition for the rule, but it affects all attacks in a full attack regardless of whether they're iterative attacks.
Does it? "The attacks" refers to specific attacks rather than all attacks - and since the sentence specifically talks about particular attacks, they're the attacks the rule applies to.

[Darrin]

That's only an option with BAB of +5 or less. Both of those types of attacks are part of a full attack action. That action includes the following rule: The BAB is the enabling condition for the rule, but it affects all attacks in a full attack regardless of whether they're iterative attacks. So you're recommending a combat stratagem that's guaranteed to break as the character advances.

I understand the rule, but I usually ignore it as a houserule because "iterative first, secondary after" is easier to explain and easier to keep track of. So long as the modifiers are kept straight, I really don't care in what specific order you roll your attacks. Requiring a particular order is pointless from a rules standpoint, unless there's some particular effect on an attack that could have an influence on subsequent attacks (such as the Distracting Attack ACF).

The key question is: does attacking with a secondary natural weapon interfere with Flurry of Blows if you're only using monk weapons for your Flurry attacks? The text is ambiguous, and the word choice of "using" doesn't tell me if this is a discrete series of events with a particular beginning and end that cannot be interrupted by anything else, or if this is just a general term for an activity that can happen during the full attack without any specific order of events. There's an argument that regardless of whether the rules tell you that fist happens first, then bite, then fist, you can say that the bite attack is still not part of the Flurry even though the rules say the bite happened in between two unarmed strikes. It's not a particularly strong argument, but there's nothing in the Flurry text that explicitly says it can't be interrupted with something else or that forbids any other non-Flurry attacks from being made.

[Curmudgeon]

Does it? "The attacks" refers to specific attacks rather than all attacks - and since the sentence specifically talks about particular attacks, they're the attacks the rule applies to.
The context of this is the Full Attack, wherein which section of the PH Combat chapter this rule is found (page 143). So "the attacks" are in the context of any full attack action.

[Boost]

Arguments like these are the perfect time to Ask the Wizards (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a):



Monks and Natural Weapons

As we saw in Part Two, a creature with natural weapons can use them for secondary attacks when using the full attack action. A monk character with natural weaponry has the same option.

For example, an 8th-level lizardfolk monk with a Strength score of 17 has a base attack bonus of +7 (+1 for its 2 humanoid Hit Dice and +6 for its monk levels). The character has three natural weapons: two claws (1d4) and one bite (1d4). For this example, we'll assume the character also has the Multiattack feat.

With the full attack action, our example monk can make two unarmed attacks thanks to its +7 base attack bonus. After adding in the +3 bonus from the monk's Strength score of 17, our example character's unarmed attacks have the following attack bonuses: +10/+5. Thanks to the monk's class level and Strength score, damage for the unarmed strikes is 1d10+3.

The example monk also can attack with its claws and bite as secondary natural attacks at a -2 penalty (thanks to the character's Multiattack feat). Each natural weapon uses the character's +7 base attack bonus and +3 Strength modifier, except that the Strength bonus on damage is halved because these are secondary attacks: 2 claws +8 (1d4+1) and bite +8 (1d4+1).

As noted last week, there are no two-weapon or off-hand penalties for these attacks.

The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry.

[Flickerdart]

The context of this is the Full Attack, wherein which section of the PH Combat chapter this rule is found (page 143). So "the attacks" are in the context of any full attack action.
Disagree. The sentence provides a narrower scope than that before saying "the attacks" so trying to expand the scope again goes against the way grammar works.

[emeraldstreak]

My DM allowed my to switch to a monk since I've always wanted to try one out and i think they will be a lot of fun. as of now we are lvl 6 and my stats are as follows
Str: 18
Dex: 16
Con: 16
Int: 16
Wis: 20
Cha: 10
the reason my stats are so high is because our DM runs a fairly high powered campaign, like we last fought a CR 8 athach and after that fought 6 lvl 5 Half-orc fighters, we typically have some rough fights. anyways i would love advice on how to play him to his full potential and further build him down the road. the feats i currently have are Improved initiative/unarmed attack/grapple/trip/dodge/stunning fist/ Weapon focus unarmed. it might be important to note my DM doesn't allow improved natural weapon and is very hesitant about AoOs, though he might incorporate them a bit. any advice on how i can develop him or play him effectively is much appreciated.


INA or play wizard

[Karl Aegis]

I understand the rule, but I usually ignore it as a houserule because "iterative first, secondary after" is easier to explain and easier to keep track of. So long as the modifiers are kept straight, I really don't care in what specific order you roll your attacks. Requiring a particular order is pointless from a rules standpoint, unless there's some particular effect on an attack that could have an influence on subsequent attacks (such as the Distracting Attack ACF).

The key question is: does attacking with a secondary natural weapon interfere with Flurry of Blows if you're only using monk weapons for your Flurry attacks? The text is ambiguous, and the word choice of "using" doesn't tell me if this is a discrete series of events with a particular beginning and end that cannot be interrupted by anything else, or if this is just a general term for an activity that can happen during the full attack without any specific order of events. There's an argument that regardless of whether the rules tell you that fist happens first, then bite, then fist, you can say that the bite attack is still not part of the Flurry even though the rules say the bite happened in between two unarmed strikes. It's not a particularly strong argument, but there's nothing in the Flurry text that explicitly says it can't be interrupted with something else or that forbids any other non-Flurry attacks from being made.

The key question is: Where does it say that a Flurry of Blows is a full attack? None of the books I own say a Flurry of Blows is a full attack; it merely uses a full attack action. It can't be used as a full attack in a pounce, either.

[Darrin]

Disagree. The sentence provides a narrower scope than that before saying "the attacks" so trying to expand the scope again goes against the way grammar works.

If we're insisting upon a strictly literal reading of RAW here, I'm inclined to agree with Flickerdart. PHB page 143:

"If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest."

Which is odd, because two paragraphs before that it says:

"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon (see Two-Weapon Fighting under Special Attacks, page 160), or for some special reason (such as a feat or a magic item) you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks."

This paragraph would include secondary attacks, most likely under the "special reason" clause. But the text that specifies "highest bonus to lowest" is pretty clear that it only applies to multiple attacks derived from your BAB.

However, I'm not sure this level of pedantry is really conducive to the smooth flow of play.


The key question is: Where does it say that a Flurry of Blows is a full attack? None of the books I own say a Flurry of Blows is a full attack; it merely uses a full attack action. It can't be used as a full attack in a pounce, either.

PHB page 40:

"A monk must use a full attack action (see page 143) to strike with a flurry of blows."

[Karl Aegis]

PHB page 40:

"A monk must use a full attack action (see page 143) to strike with a flurry of blows."

So where does it say a Flurry of Blows is a full attack?

[Darrin]

So where does it say a Flurry of Blows is a full attack?

I would imagine it's in the same place where it says monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.

[Sliver]

I would imagine it's in the same place where it says monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.

If only the monk had a humanoid RHD, he would have been proficient. But sadly, he exchanged it.

[prufock]

The point of contention is this line here from the PHB:

"When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham)."
Actually I think you're right on this count. The Rules of the Game (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a) article agrees with this interpretation. "The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry." So I'll have to remove the second attack for flurrying.


That's only an option with BAB of +5 or less.

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest.
"The attacks" in the second clause refers to the first clause, which only applies to iterative BAB. It doesn't work as I thought it did, but for the reason noted above, not this one.

The takeaway, OP, is that you lose the second unarmed attack for flurry. You retain 2 options, though, for a full attack. Flurry of unarmed strikes (at -2/-2) or a single unarmed strike followed by three natural attacks (at -5 each). I still say the three natural attacks are worth the investment for a core monk, but not as much as I originally thought.

[Darrin]

Actually I think you're right on this count. The Rules of the Game (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a) article agrees with this interpretation. "The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry." So I'll have to remove the second attack for flurrying.

Skip's articles aren't part of the official rules canon. At best, they're FAQ interpretations or "RAS" (Rules According to Skip). It's also mildly amusing that his statement is a bit contradictory, as flurry works just fine with unarmed strikes, which are considered natural weaponry.

At any rate, this area of the rules is a good place to say, "Go with whatever works best for your game."

[prufock]

Skip's articles aren't part of the official rules canon.
I know, but I now think the reasoning is valid. Flurry basically gives you an extra attack in a full attack, with all attacks at -2. You can only use monk weapons in a flurry, which natural weapons are not.

[Curmudgeon]

"The attacks" in the second clause refers to the first clause, which only applies to iterative BAB.
I disagree. "These (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/these?s=t) attacks" would refer back to the conditional clause just mentioned. "The attacks" does not.

[emeraldstreak]

INA aside, the quick and dirty Core things are:

- permanencied Great Fang (far cheaper than the 200k neckpiece)

- pemanencied Enlarge

- Divine Power ... it's a must have, find a party buffer, cohort, custom item, metamagic... just find it


- all the usual defensive shenanigs everyone else would want too...starting from delay poison (ranger made) to Deathward and Freedom of Movement and energy resistances

- mage armor for the low levels

- Use Magic Device...cross class doesnt matter wands are DC 20 only and being able to casts spells up to lvl 4 on your own is a big deal

[Flickerdart]

I disagree. "These (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/these?s=t) attacks" would refer back to the conditional clause just mentioned. "The attacks" does not.
It is conceivable that two different words might mean the same thing. In this case, "the" and "these" are equivalent.

[Curmudgeon]

It is conceivable that two different words might mean the same thing.
Yes, it's conceivable. However, one word choice ("these") makes it unambiguously the case; the other ("the") makes it unlikely simply because the other choice was eschewed.

In this case, "the" and "these" are equivalent.
I don't see that as at all likely, as the authors avoided appending those two extra letters which would have demonstrated their agreement with your view.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, it's conceivable. However, one word choice ("these") makes it unambiguously the case; the other ("the") makes it unlikely simply because the other choice was eschewed.

I don't see that as at all likely, as the authors avoided appending those two extra letters which would have demonstrated their agreement with your view.
The books are full of language that could have been made less ambiguous but wasn't. This argument holds no water.

[Darrin]

Yes, it's conceivable. However, one word choice ("these") makes it unambiguously the case; the other ("the") makes it unlikely simply because the other choice was eschewed.

This is a stretch. The only thing unambiguous here is the presence of ambiguity.

[prufock]

Yes, it's conceivable. However, one word choice ("these") makes it unambiguously the case; the other ("the") makes it unlikely simply because the other choice was eschewed.
Pretty flimsy, since the reverse is also true. "Any" or "all" attacks would have made it unambiguous the other way around.

The general case in English is that the first clause is indefinite and the second clause is definite. "Three men are walking down the road, and there are three dogs with the men." In the second clause, "the" men is definite, referring back to the first clause, not to all men. In the full attack wording, "multiple attacks" is indefinite and "the" is definite referring back to it, not to all attacks.

[Snowbluff]

Can you commit sepuku? Dammit you don't have access to katana AND monks can't use them. :smalltongue:

[Seerow]

There's only one full attack here. The natural weapons are being added as secondary attacks after the Flurry. There's an argument that so long as the natural attacks aren't used in the Flurry attacks, then they can still be used after the Flurry. The rules for Flurry aren't explicit enough to say that any additional attacks after the Flurry that don't involve monk weapons can't be made. The Flurry rules are... pretty vague. This is more of a DM's Call, really... but if this is a Core Monk, then it's probably worth it to rule in the Monk's favor in this case (probably won't help, but it's not going to hurt anything).

We're talking about a DM who is restricting to core only and on top of that banning INA and Attacks of Opportunity. You are really expecting questionable rulings in the player's favor?



Seriously, play something that is not a monk. Any of the casters should be fine. Save your dreams of playing a Monk for a DM who is not out to make sure you cannot possibly be competent.

[Troacctid]

I maintain that Monk is a totally legitimate class at low levels. You just need to multiclass out starting right now, because it is straight-up garbage past level 6.

Like I said before, go into Druid or Cleric. Good synergy with Monk abilities, and you end up being a better fighter and a better caster than a Ranger or Paladin of your level would be.