PDA

View Full Version : So why is the monk weak?



Pages : [1] 2 3

Whiplord
2007-05-23, 05:23 PM
I hear lots of people talking about how the monk is the weakest of the core classes, and seen a few brief reasons (low BAB, etc).

But prior to coming here, I had always thought that it's special abilities (ki strike, etc) somewhat balanced it out. Oh, and my DM insists it's brokenly powerful, and that just seems wrong to me.

So a slightly more detailed description of it's weaknesses would do much to appease my curiosity.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-05-23, 05:28 PM
Damage is low. Has lack of variety to hurt creatures with damage reductions other than /Law or /Adamantine. Flurry is inacurate and unusable in conjuction with fast movement. Abilities are too situational and are of little help. Defence is considered a poor option for specialisation.

Mostly it's the dependancy on too many ability scores.

Spiryt
2007-05-23, 05:33 PM
You know monk has quit impressive survive abilities and many fine abilities ( His SPEED, slow fall, purity of body ec).

But good look at his abilities shows that he have VERY serious problem with dealing damage.

Arbitrarity
2007-05-23, 05:37 PM
It has no useful contribution to a party. It can keep itself alive, that's mostly it. It needs multiple high scores, and needs to make full attacks, while being an agile combatant, to deal so-so damage.

Ki-strike = +1 sure striking adamantine weapon. Except worse. And you can't use magic weapons. Monk weapons do less damage than your fists still.

Timeless body, tongue of sun and moon, and even perfect self are pretty worthless. Perfect self DR is bypassed by everything at that level, and the rest renders you immune to any "person" spell. Ok...

Abundant step is 1/day, and doens't allow getting and staying in some places (i.e. flying). Diamond soul can be bypassed by certain spells.

Quivering palm is 1/week. Yeah, ok....

Empty body is w/e. An cloak of etherealness does a much better job, and it's mostly good for fleeing or sneaking.

Wholeness of body is self only, and at most, 40 hp.

Improved evasion is nice, but doesn't help against smart casters.

Immunity to poison and disease can be gotten by the warforged, or by a few items. Or, you can talk to the cleric. Or, you realize disease means almost nothing anyways when you can talk to the cleric.

Mostly, the issue is MAD, and a bunch of abilities designed to make it appear to be covered in abilities.

Slow fall? Feather fall. See the ring if you want it all the time.

The_Pyre
2007-05-23, 05:38 PM
The monk is very hard to kill. Unfortunately, that hardly translates into anything useful in a party when you can't deal decent damage and you can't take attacks meant for someone else.

He's got good mobility, though, but unfortunately low damage means it's not very effective, too. Maybe in D&D Minis it would be very good, but in conventional party play, it's a bit wanting.

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-23, 05:44 PM
Low mobility later on (i.e. no flight without the wizard), Multiple Attribute Dependency (MAD), medium BAB so he won't be hitting anything (especially with flurry of blows) and an inability to get past Damage Reduction later on all come to mind.

The special abilities are many, but in the monk's case it's quantity over quality; most of them suck.

A monk can survive, and he can run away. And that's about it as the general rule.

Spiryt
2007-05-23, 05:47 PM
Monk can be qiute good if your game isn't standart dungeon crawl, but consist some interesting challenges, where defense can useful too.
Even in that case, fights between powerful heroes/ villains/monsters is main part of D&D. And its hard to fight when you can't harm anybody since your damage is low, and you attack bonus is not good too,

silentknight
2007-05-23, 05:50 PM
Bleh, say what you will, but a monk character was one of the toughest characters I've ever DM'd. It was difficult for any opponent to hit him, he consistently killed enemies before the fighter/barb could get to them, and he stood in the middle of spells cast by allies, taking no damage.

Sure, in a perfect world, with exactly the right thing at exactly the right time, certain classes may appear "weaker" or "stonger" than others, but in play it all evens out. Play for fun, not for win.

Turcano
2007-05-23, 05:52 PM
Immunity to poison and disease can be gotten by the warforged, or by a few items. Or, you can talk to the cleric. Or, you realize disease means almost nothing anyways when you can talk to the cleric.

You can also, you know, play a druid, which has immunity to poison and remove disease, in addition to relatively useful class features.

Indon
2007-05-23, 05:53 PM
Monks, with little to no optimization, generally don't do very well offensively. You need to tweak them with a mind of offensive capability to make them anything close to a melee powerhouse. They do have good potential to contribute to a party, though, with a bit of foresight and maybe some sourcebooks.

Reptilius
2007-05-23, 05:54 PM
Damage is low. Has lack of variety to hurt creatures with damage reductions other than /Law or /Adamantine. Flurry is inacurate and unusable in conjuction with fast movement. Abilities are too situational and are of little help. Defence is considered a poor option for specialisation.

Mostly it's the dependancy on too many ability scores.

Point 1: Take Improved Natural attack for Unarmed Strike. It's perfectly legal.
Point 2: Monks aren't always warrior damage-dealer types. Against these foes, play the support, skill-user, or distraction role.
Point 3: I agree with you there. I would take the PHBII Decisive Strike replacement.
Point 4: Blasphemy! Teleportation, Tongues, spell resistance, evasion, instant death attacks (stunning fist and Quivering Palm), Etherealness, and lots of useful skills?!? Not counting that you become an otherworldly being at level 20, too. These are not "too situational."
Point 5: I agree with you there, too.
Point 6: Not really. Int goes somewhat unused, and Cha is ignored. Wis, Dex, and Str are necessary, with Con a close second. Most classes need only three or four ability scores to function anyway.

raistlin807
2007-05-23, 05:58 PM
My party has decided that the monk exists for no other reason than to kill wizzards. Spell resistance, good saves, speed and all other kinds of badness make it pretty much only useful for slipping past the font line meatsheilds and takiing dowen the caster before he can do much. It's not great but it's something.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-05-23, 06:00 PM
Point 1: Take Improved Natural attack for Unarmed Strike. It's perfectly legal.
Point 2: Monks aren't always warrior damage-dealer types. Against these foes, play the support, skill-user, or distraction role.
Point 3: I agree with you there. I would take the PHBII Decisive Strike replacement.
Point 4: Blasphemy! Teleportation, Tongues, spell resistance, evasion, instant death attacks (stunning fist and Quivering Palm), Etherealness, and lots of useful skills?!? Not counting that you become an otherworldly being at level 20, too. These are not "too situational."
Point 5: I agree with you there, too.
Point 6: Not really. Int goes somewhat unused, and Cha is ignored. Wis, Dex, and Str are necessary, with Con a close second. Most classes need only three or four ability scores to function anyway.

I was summerising commonly brought up points in answer to the original poster's question.

I've no experience with monks so I don't know how they work in a game.

I've always wanted to do a Monk duelist though. It works with a Siangham, it's just not powerful unless I could take Kung Fu Genius and get Int to AC twice, which I wouldn't allow as a DM so I won't try it as a player.

Gavin Sage
2007-05-23, 06:01 PM
I'm curious with people saying trouble dealing damage... as compared to what? Because compared to mages well yes but that's why mages have limited amounts of spells. Next to a fighter though, with Flurry of Blows you have more attacks at higher percetage of the BAB once things get going, and damage wise are doing 1d10+ from 8th level onward. Okay if the Fighter gets a really good magic item that can change things, but if they don't? And there are magic weapons monks can use too, Ki-focus or the like if memory serves.

Personally I'd say the weakpoint of Monks is they are fifth characters who don't fit into the simple party structure. Not skilled enough to replace the rogue and what not.

I always remember that I soloed Baldur Gate II with a Monk though, so will always have some level of respect from me.

SurlySeraph
2007-05-23, 06:05 PM
Monk weapons are actually quite decent - if they've got elemental enchantments on them, and if you use Flurry of Blows. Dual-wielding kamas with Greater Flurry of Blows and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting gets you what, 9 attacks per round at 20th level? (I saw a good build using this, I don't remember specifically). The trick is to get Flaming, Shocking, Icy, Thundering weapons to take advantage of all those attacks - adding a 1d6 to every attack doesn't suck if you have 9 attacks per round. Still, as has been noted, the monk's real power is in avoiding damage. So use him as a tank. If you ignore Strength and just max Wisdom and Dexterity (and take Weapon Finesse to compensate), it isn't hard to get a monk who can't be hit except on natural 20s. Plus, the monk's high saves mean he's the best person to set off traps if you don't have a barbarian handy. The monk still isn't optimal, but a well-optimized monk is definitely useful.

Indon
2007-05-23, 06:05 PM
Next to a fighter though, with Flurry of Blows you have more attacks at higher percetage of the BAB once things get going, and damage wise are doing 1d10+ from 8th level onward.

Well, hit-for-hit, a full-BAB power attack reduced by, say, 3 or 4 to be in-line with the Monk, will deal okay dice damage as well (1d10 for some swords, or maybe 1d8, whatever) and then a two-handed weapon gains double power attack benefit, for 6 or 8 flat additional damage. 8 damage is the statistical average of 2d6+1 all by itself.

Of course, monks can pump that up crazy much, with feats such as Improved natural Attack, greater unarmed strike (or whatever it's called), items such as Monk's belts, and effects such as size increases. But if you don't aim for something like that, you may be overshadowed by the guy with the big 2-hander.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-05-23, 06:07 PM
I'm curious with people saying trouble dealing damage... as compared to what? Because compared to mages well yes but that's why mages have limited amounts of spells. Next to a fighter though, with Flurry of Blows you have more attacks at higher percetage of the BAB once things get going, and damage wise are doing 1d10+ from 8th level onward. Okay if the Fighter gets a really good magic item that can change things, but if they don't? And there are magic weapons monks can use too, Ki-focus or the like if memory serves.

Monks tend to have low strength and can't get x2 power attack damage. 2d10 just isn't as spiffy as it sounds since it averages as less than a +5 frost longsword.

Why they have low Str is beyond me since in theory they can dump Dex and rely on Wisdom for armour class. However normally you end up needing both wisdom and dex to make up for lack of armour.

I made a Prc on these boards a while ago for high strength monks (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35803&highlight=brutal+fist) but it's homebrew so isn't really part of the problem.

I tend to find that any class will do fine with a Wizard supporting it but most people expect wizards to be selfish (despite having more than enough spare spell slots when it comes down to it) and it is kind of annoying to have to rely on philantropy from a slice of cheese.

Spiryt
2007-05-23, 06:08 PM
Personally i never liked monks too much anyway.
Destroying dragon with powerful magic? Sure. Okay.
Make dragon bleed to death from wounds made by your trust, ancient axe? No problem.
But punch dragon down?!? In some Bruce Li style? Don't think so... It just wont work even in fantasy world.

Aquillion
2007-05-23, 06:12 PM
Sure, in a perfect world, with exactly the right thing at exactly the right time, certain classes may appear "weaker" or "stonger" than others, but in play it all evens out. Play for fun, not for win.I notice that people who argue that underpowered classes aren't underpowered always end this by saying "but you shouldn't care about class balance anyway!"

Monks are a poorly-thought-out class. They have lots of abilities, but few of them help them do the things that they need to be able to do... for instance, they can perform large numbers of attacks, but they need a full-attack action to use this, and get absolutely no support for getting one. Without that critical ability to actually apply those attacks, what use are they? Fighters have the same problem, but fighters can benefit from a wide variety of special weapons, have a reliable first hit, and can at least try and put together a useful, focused build with their feats... Monks fail in all of these. Even when they can make their attacks, they don't have a high to-hit, and without special weapons or effective support feats their damage falls behind rapidly.

Most of their 'special' abilities are flavor. A single save-or-die once a week? Thanks awfully. One dimension door a day isn't bad, but isn't very impressive, either. The rest falls off much, much more sharply, and much of it can be replicated with fairly commonly-used items, or will be provided when necessary by much more effective party members devoted to that specific area. (e.g. the wizard handles save-or-dies better and more than once a week; the cleric/druid handles disease, etc.)

They have survivability, and this actually makes them somewhat useful as high-level NPC opponents (their 1/week and 1/day abilities are also better when they only have to last one encounter.) For a PC, though, the monsters will just kill everyone but the monk first... to be useful, fighter-types have to be able to protect weaker allies, or help kill things fast enough to keep them alive. Monks can do neither; they don't work well in a party.

Of course everyone has anecdotal stories of useful monks... even a commoner can be useful sometimes. But that doesn't change the fact that they are, by and large, a poorly-designed class.

(I personally never understood why they were core in any case; both their flavor and their general design belongs in an Oriental Adventures-style splatbook, not in core. Swordsages are more general-themed, more interesting, and better-designed mechanically... those should probably replace them.)

Draz74
2007-05-23, 06:13 PM
What does your DM think a Monk can actually do that's overpowered?

Spring Attack hit-and-run guerrilla tactics, so that he can actually use his high speed to be useful in combat? That is a good tactic for a Monk-on-monster duel, with no other characters around and no time limit on the duel. But normally, it's a very slow way to contribute to a battle and doesn't protect your fellow party members in the meantime.

Quivering Palm? By the time the Monk can do a save-or-die ability 1/WEEK, the spellcasters of his level can be casting Level 7 spells even if they're not optimized. Finger of Death 1/day will overshadow your Quivering Palm 1/week, and then you factor in a couple Baleful Polymorphs per day too ...

Flurry of Blows? Well, people do exaggerate its uselessness, claiming it "never hits," when that's not true -- especially at high levels, when Flurry doesn't actually give your attacks a penalty. But it only works in a full attack. Melee types have a hard enough time even getting full attacks at these levels; that's part of why abilities that give them decent damage on one attack (Power Attack/Leap Attack, or Tome of Battle strikes) are such a blessing to them. Monks can't use Power Attack very well, due to mediocre BAB. Cool-looking unarmed strike damage doesn't make up for that. And they don't really want to make full attacks anyway, because then their mediocre HP are sitting right where the opponent can hit them. They have even more of a problem with this than Rangers, because at least the Ranger can probably afford better Constitution than the Monk. (The Ranger, like the Monk, needs Str, Dex, Con, and Wis; but if he's a melee Ranger, he needs Dex less than the Monk does, because he's got light armor.)

The Monk's amazing AC is a myth, too. Try it out. Unless the Monk has way better ability scores, he won't have as good of AC as the other fighting classes. Armor -- even light armor -- is just such a cheap way to get a few more points of AC.

Grappling? You need high BAB to be a really good grappler. (Same goes for disarming.) Yes, a Grappling Monk can be a good anti-caster, but he's a one-trick pony that can't grapple actual warrior foes. And even his ability to grapple casters breaks down at high level when the casters start buying Freedom of Movement Rings in case they get grappled.

What good is the Monk? It's a decent class to dip, for a Psychic Warrior, Cleric (especially Cloistered), or Druid. And even the Monk 2/Psychic Warrior X, although that's a pretty good Core-Only melee build, is overshadowed by the Swordsage, if your game allows the Swordsage. (Or possibly by a straight Psychic Warrior. Hmph.)

The_Snark
2007-05-23, 06:14 PM
In a game where the characters aren't optimizing, the monk does fine. He's not as tough a melee combatant as your full-plate paladin or fighter, of course, but he's got better mobility and skills. Remember, the monk is partially a skill monkey, and nobody expects the rogue to be able to match a well-played fighter in melee combat.

So, in a game where you have, say, a sword-and-shield paladin, a rogue, a sorcerer with a focus on evocation, and a cleric (inoffensively played), a monk will do fine. That's not a bad way to play at all. In a game with a frenzied berserker, a TWF rogue/swashbuckler, a Batman-style wizard, and a druid with Natural Spell and good spell/wild shape selection, the monk will fall behind. In any game that involves Tome of Battle, a swordsage will outshine any monk in all its best areas.

Couple points in their defense- First, Flurry of Blows increases your total chance of hitting almost all the time. I have seen the math done on this one; even at level 1, if you can flurry you ought to. Decisive Strike isn't really any better, because you still take attack penalties and it's still a full-round action.


I always remember that I soloed Baldur Gate II with a Monk though, so will always have some level of respect from me.

They're good for solo campaigns, actually, as are warlocks. Classes that deal damage slowly and are good at evading harm can do quite nicely when they don't have to worry about the monster killing all their party members while they whittle it down with Spring Attack.

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-23, 06:17 PM
My party has decided that the monk exists for no other reason than to kill wizzards. Spell resistance, good saves, speed and all other kinds of badness make it pretty much only useful for slipping past the font line meatsheilds and takiing dowen the caster before he can do much. It's not great but it's something.

Except that all a wizard has to do is cast Fly, or Invisibility, and the monk can't touch him. At later levels, Overland Flight, Greater Invisibility, and Contingencied Dimension Door mean that the monk can't even dream of getting close.

silentknight
2007-05-23, 06:33 PM
Double Bleh, I just don't understand the desire to optimize and compare relative strengths to the point of considering a class broken or weak.

To me, it's like trying to turn your Schwin into a Harley, when all your friends want to do is ride bikes around the neighborhood.

Of course, I realize that most of those who compare the classes and uber-builds do so because that is what you like. I'll take my soap box with me.

EvilElitest
2007-05-23, 06:39 PM
Question for everybody

If the save or die attack became 1/day and the telport became 3/day

And the flurry of blows were increased to be better

And the Monk's attack increased, would it be balenced with the fighter?
from,
EE

Zincorium
2007-05-23, 06:44 PM
My problem with monks is that they presuppose something very specific (schools which teach unarmored, unarmed fighting and channeling the inner strength that is Ki), narrow it even further by giving each monk a very similiar progression in terms of Ki. When you reach 11th level, you resist spells. Bam. They're all the same in that way.

Now it says you have these monks in all published settings, without really giving a reason they're exactly the same in all of them. It took a whole 'nother book, unearthed arcana, to portray different schools of teachings, and that didn't even touch the Ki abilities.


As far as game abilities, I just don't really see the reason they're there, other than to allow people to play a character without obvious armament without dying every five seconds. Problem is, they decided to balance it against fighter and tone it down a little so that they don't outshine fighters at what fighters are good at.

Now, monks are scarcely more capable in combat than a cleric, they have the skill points of a barbarian with a moderately good list, and special abilities that duplicate spells the casters will have gotten access to earlier and then add in a time between uses that makes them impossible to rely on.

Without very high ability scores (at least two 16+'s just for AC) monks don't have an advantage as far as defense goes. They're pathetic while wearing even light armor, so the only option they have in that arena are bracers of armor, which cost significantly more for any given value than worn armor does, everything else (amulets of natural armor) can be purchased about as easily by other classes.

Other defensive options people suggest that work poorly for monks:

Fighting defensively/combat expertise: Oh right, I was supposed to be hitting things when I roll dice? My bad. I guess my poor strength and mediocre BAB just don't hold up when I'm penalizing them further every round.

Mobile attacking (spring attack, etc.): Similiar to above. You can't flurry, you do less damage on a single hit than any decent fighter, and that's assuming you do hit. You might have been there during combat, but you probably didn't help the party much.

Small size: Less damage? Woohoo. I was having trouble with that already. 2d6 damage at 19th level is not impressive. Maybe that +1 to hit will help me out with that other problem though...


And of course, the consequences of being hit:

You have a smaller hit die than any other class which is intended to 'tank'.
Unless it's a very high powered game, you don't have the rolls to give yourself an excellent constitution score.
By the time you get DR as a class feature, you will probably never, ever use it.

Ardantis
2007-05-23, 07:00 PM
I have things to add to both sides here-

1. Monks are ill-conceived for a European fantasy world, which DnD unquestionably is. I find them to be very silly, punching dragons and the like. Or to paraphrase the way Belkar put it in Rich Burlew's prequel comic, while they're busy "training" in their "dojos," the rest of us just put on heavy armor and picked up a large metal stick to get essentially the same abilities, so we could go out and talk to girls in our spare time. They also can't keep up with well made characters of other classes while still contributing to a team.

2. MAN, though, are Monks great for two things- splashing for Wis to AC and some other abilities, and GESTALT. Insane Gestalt characters need two things from their base classes- spellcasting and class abilities. A monk gets lots of fun class abilities and AC bonuses with NO NEED FOR ARMOR- meaning they gestalt with arcane casting classes better than anybody.

For what it's worth, they can blend into a party pretty well IF the universe allows for significant Oriental flavor from outside the area, OR they're the party guide in a group of strangers in a strange land.

Raum
2007-05-23, 07:54 PM
1. Monks are ill-conceived for a European fantasy world, which DnD unquestionably is.Huh? Only if you're playing on a historical earth. They've been incorporated into the TSR and WotC published worlds from close to the beginning. And many of the published worlds have very little in common with "European fantasy." Eberron for a current example.

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-23, 08:05 PM
I have allways enjoyed playing a Monk, since way back in the first edition. And know they are not the damage dealers a good Fighter is, or that a Ranger can be with chosen enemies.
Or any spell caster at higher levels.

But they are the fastest characters, and have the best saves. They hold there own best in low magic campaigns. Or with a few tweeks gained from selective alternate classes and Prestige classes.

It's a ROLEPLAYING game after all. And all the classes have there good points and not so good points. Except for the strait up Fighter who has the best combat options in the game. ( 19 feats by level 20! )

Everyone has to protect the Cleric so he can buff the party. And the Wizard/Sorceror for offensive spells.

So if you want the best damage dealers? Then run a party of Fighters. Until after slaughtering that Orc village. You get some healing before the raiding Party of Orc Warriors comes home. Or a Thief if you need someone to find a way around that trap that impaled the Fighter with the 20 strength! Or perhaps when that Horde of Trolls has chased you to the edge of a cliff and you don't have a Wizard to cast a feather fall.

Each class working in co-operation helps the party to be more effective, than working independently.

My favorite tweek for the Monk is in the book of Exalted Deeds. Specificaly the Vow of Poverty! With it you don't need no stinkin Magic!

The DM at the time didn't read through it when he allowed me to use it. And since he runs a Magic light game all the other player's were not happy.
And when he allowed me to become a Saint it was way broken!

Ardantis
2007-05-23, 08:15 PM
Thanks for the semantic catch, what I meant to say is that much of modern DnD is DERIVED from European fantasy, in which Monks don't seem to really fit in. They are definately "outsiders" and should be treated culturally as such.

Eberron, being developed in Denver, I think, has likely benefitted from the cultural influence of Asia much more so than previous settings (Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Ravenloft etc.) However, from what I understand, it's still pretty Eurocentric, to the point where Monks are still sort of a cultural crowbar into a universe derived mainly from a European outlook (dress, combat technique, magic, etc.)

Oh, and Monks would get cold! If the story parts of the universe are temperate, like Europe, Monks represented in the books are dressed in a ridiculous fashion for winter! Even in Forgotten Realms, a large universe with areas that might fit Monks culturally or in terms of climate, how many of them would venture into the frozen North to fight beside or do battle with the likes of Drizzt?

So, it's very difficult to get Monks to fit in well, especially if your characters are supposed to have a tight bond. He'd get some weird looks, likely some xenophobia, and probably wouldn't be too good at disguising himself. The fact that they are a core class doesn't sit well with me. They're about as core as a samurai, put 'em in a splatbook.

greenknight
2007-05-23, 08:19 PM
And the Monk's attack increased, would it be balenced with the fighter?

I think it's best to leave the BAB alone, but allow the Monk to make a full attack as a standard action while using Monk weapons or unarmed attacks (note: natural attacks such as claw attacks shouldn't qualify). That would allow them to be a very effective skirmisher. Add in something like Air Walk at higher levels, and they could also take on fliers.

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-23, 08:27 PM
Oh, and Monks would get cold! If the story parts of the universe are temperate, like Europe, Monks represented in the books are dressed in a ridiculous fashion for winter! Even in Forgotten Realms, a large universe with areas that might fit Monks culturally or in terms of climate, how many of them would venture into the frozen North to fight beside or do battle with the likes of Drizzt?the MONKS would get cold? What about the wizard? Ember at least is wearing pants. And don't get me started on Hennet and his shirtless "charisma."

Or your old-school fantasy heroines, they must have been cold a lot. :smallbiggrin:

Jasdoif
2007-05-23, 08:29 PM
the MONKS would get cold? What about the wizard? Ember at least is wearing pants. And don't get me started on Hennet and his shirtless "charisma."

Or your old-school fantasy heroines, they must have been cold a lot. :smallbiggrin:...And now we know the story behind how endure elements (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/endureElements.htm) came into the world.

my_evil_twin
2007-05-23, 08:38 PM
...And now we know the story behind how endure elements (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/endureElements.htm) came into the world.
This reminds me of a splatbook I saw once, I forget where, that said that casting spells generated heat, and that's why spellcasters gotta run around dressed like it's mardi gras.
[/hijack]

Edit:
...that wouldn't happen to be the BoEF, would it?No. Magic of... Somewhere, I think.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-23, 08:41 PM
This reminds me of a splatbook I saw once, I forget where, that said that casting spells generated heat, and that's why spellcasters gotta run around dressed like it's mardi gras.
[/hijack]

...that wouldn't happen to be the BoEF, would it?

Zincorium
2007-05-23, 08:43 PM
Just to note, I'm not attacking you, but you obviously see things very differently than I do, and I'd like to see a bit more of why your opinions are the way they are.


I have allways enjoyed playing a Monk, since way back in the first edition. And know they are not the damage dealers a good Fighter is, or that a Ranger can be with chosen enemies.
Or any spell caster at higher levels.


Gotcha. But what, exactly, are they? That's what is missing: a solid role that no one except the monk, or another monk-like class, can perform. The problem is it doesn't exist by default.



But they are the fastest characters, and have the best saves. They hold there own best in low magic campaigns. Or with a few tweeks gained from selective alternate classes and Prestige classes.


In terms of simple land speed, yes. But they don't have the ability to fly. Or stop time. And their teleport ability is both somewhat odd and is seldom the best available to the party. They also do have good saves, which would mean a lot more if not for the significant number of spells which do not allow saves.

Really, the fact that they work well in a low magic game, which I'm assuming means that they continue to get all abilities (even supernatural or obviously magically enhanced ones) while no one else can play casters or get so much as a +1 weapon, should point out just how comparatively ill-suited they are to the style of play demonstrated throughout the books. As for alternate classes or PrCs, there are few that actually improve the monk's abilities, and few are good. Those that are tend to combine the monk with casters/manifesters.



It's a ROLEPLAYING game after all. And all the classes have there good points and not so good points. Except for the strait up Fighter who has the best combat options in the game. ( 19 feats by level 20! )


Hm, well, I kind of have to agree with the word 'options', since they have the opportunity to take more of what's out there than anyone else. The reason that's not really meaningful is that no feat yet is anywhere near as good as the spells that are available at that time.

You've already mentioned the good points, and others have mentioned the bad, and when I total them up in my head the monk is very much taking a beating.



Everyone has to protect the Cleric so he can buff the party. And the Wizard/Sorceror for offensive spells.


Not so much in my games, and from what I've been told, not in the games most players on the board are in. Thing is, there is nothing the monk or fighter can do to keep the wizard or cleric from being attacked if the monster is set on doing just that. As well, the clerics are usually more than able to protect themselves, and the mages focus less on offensive spells than controlling the battlefield or buffing the party as a whole.



So if you want the best damage dealers? Then run a party of Fighters. Until after slaughtering that Orc village. You get some healing before the raiding Party of Orc Warriors comes home. Or a Thief if you need someone to find a way around that trap that impaled the Fighter with the 20 strength! Or perhaps when that Horde of Trolls has chased you to the edge of a cliff and you don't have a Wizard to cast a feather fall.


Yep. Maybe. Depends on the way you play. But what function is the monk filling? I don't have a good answer.



Each class working in co-operation helps the party to be more effective, than working independently.

My favorite tweek for the Monk is in the book of Exalted Deeds. Specificaly the Vow of Poverty! With it you don't need no stinkin Magic!


Seriously, you may not realize it, but that feat is probably the stupidest thing WotC has allowed their people to write up. You can't own any magic items, which in most cases means you don't have the ability to really use them. Potions, especially of healing. Flying magic.

You depend for every need not covered by that feat on the spellcasters in the party. Guess what? If your party doesn't have the full casters, or they refuse to keep helping you for free when you do nothing for them (not everybody wants to play exalted), you have lost access to those things, and the others haven't.

As well, the bonuses are barely equal to the treasure a character is supposed to have, assuming a character who can spend their gold wisely and can gain a fair share when the loot is divided.



The DM at the time didn't read through it when he allowed me to use it. And since he runs a Magic light game all the other player's were not happy.
And when he allowed me to become a Saint it was way broken!

Saint is broken, and should have been incredibly difficult to get (it doesn't seem like it was. I mean, there's a guide for the DM as to what becoming a saint takes). ALL exalted feats require DM permission for good reasons. That your DM allowed that feat, without reading it, in a low magic game does not speak well of them. And it proves nothing as far as how good the feat is in a game where such errors were not made and compounded.

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-23, 09:06 PM
Good review of the points I laid out, Zincorium.

Ok let's look at it, using a different paradigm. Why do we like to play different classes. Other than how much they can do???

Because we think their COOL!

If you've never played D&D before, but you just watched any of the Lord of the Rings movies. You might wonder what you could do in Aragorn's shoe's, Gimli's boot's, Legolas's slippers or even the bare feet of any Hobbit!

We all identify to some degree our hero's from book's and movie's.
And if a Monk dosn't exactly fit in a magic medival game world. It would be very cool!
Ever wanted to kick ass as a Jackie Chan or Jet Li? I'm old school so it stared with the Bruce Lee for me.
Pick any other fantasy movie charachter from the Orient. With their special training/focus they can literally defeat armies!

Or at least some evil warlord and his small army.

About the only thing they got wrong was that the Monk should have the BAB of a Fighter. And in all those movies the Monk's used swords if they wanted.

Xykon_Fan
2007-05-23, 09:22 PM
I personally would suggest taking the monk, ditching some of their special abilities that are a little weak, and then proceeding to ToB them with the Setting Sun Maneuvers for free at the levels w/out special abilities anymore. As for the BAB, yeah, that would probably make more sense, but I might still give them less than three attacks at their highest BAB for flurry. Probably have it be two attacks at 20, and then proceed from there. However, that's just my take. I haven't played a monk before, but I've made one pretty sophisticated blind monk (Yes, I know this is overdone) using the VoP. (Yes, I realize it's a pretty lame mechanic, but the RP aspect was what was important.)

Thanks,
XF

Talya
2007-05-23, 09:24 PM
I think it's best to leave the BAB alone, but allow the Monk to make a full attack as a standard action while using Monk weapons or unarmed attacks (note: natural attacks such as claw attacks shouldn't qualify).


On that note, why not? Short of creatures you'd never be allowed to play, I've never seen claw attacks that can do more damage than the 2d10 (or even 4d8 with improved natural attack...which would only apply to a monk's natural form) anyway.

Arbitrarity
2007-05-23, 09:27 PM
Except for a goliath monk with improved natural attack, Monk 11 with superior unarmed strike, and monk's belt, and 7 levels of psychic warrior, manifesting augmented expansion.

Then he does 12d8.

Ah, missed the never allowed to play clause :smallbiggrin:

Zincorium
2007-05-23, 09:40 PM
Good review of the points I laid out, Zincorium.

Ok let's look at it, using a different paradigm. Why do we like to play different classes. Other than how much they can do???

Because we think their COOL!

If you've never played D&D before, but you just watched any of the Lord of the Rings movies. You might wonder what you could do in Aragorn's shoe's, Gimli's boot's, Legolas's slippers or even the bare feet of any Hobbit!

We all identify to some degree our hero's from book's and movie's.
And if a Monk dosn't exactly fit in a magic medival game world. It would be very cool!
Ever wanted to kick ass as a Jackie Chan or Jet Li? I'm old school so it stared with the Bruce Lee for me.
Pick any other fantasy movie charachter from the Orient. With their special training/focus they can literally defeat armies!

Or at least some evil warlord and his small army.

About the only thing they got wrong was that the Monk should have the BAB of a Fighter. And in all those movies the Monk's used swords if they wanted.

Well, really, there are much better games for playing such a martial artist, that don't require placing it in D&D. D20 modern, a similiar analogue, has a martial artist PrC that actually replicates what Bruce Lee or his fictional analogues would be capable of.

A key point in our disagreement is that I don't think the apparent coolness of something is a justification for mechanical properties that simply don't reflect the expectations of the players. When I imagine what a oriental martial artist could do, relative to a dark-ages knight or somesuch, then compare what I imagine to D&D, things do not match up.

In D&D, a monk requires special training, equivalent to someone who has never seen violence, to use any of the common weapons other than a staff. Swords, axes, bows, and other staples of medieval warfare, in both oriental and western mythologies, are apparently very hard to grasp.

Monks tend to be very poor at grappling, tripping, and disarming compared to any full BAB class, especially those who only need to focus on strength to be effective. This is the exact opposite of how that should be. Instead, they're good at running away, resisting the effects of fireballs, and teleporting from place to place. Something is very, very wrong with that.

And really, watching most martial arts movies, that rift between expectation and class features continues to grow. Most characters are very poorly represented by monks.

Really, check out Tome of Battle: the Book of Nine Swords if you haven't already. That contains a lot of material you'd appear to like, and it corrects to a large degree the disconnect that the monk class is.

Talya
2007-05-23, 10:23 PM
Except for a goliath monk with improved natural attack,

Goliath fists are on the medium monk chart.

Gavin Sage
2007-05-23, 10:25 PM
Gotcha. But what, exactly, are they? That's what is missing: a solid role that no one except the monk, or another monk-like class, can perform. The problem is it doesn't exist by default.

So in a four PC game is no place for a monk. No big deal there. I mean if you want to get down to it there are four roles right? The melee tank, the support and skill horse rogue, the healer cleric, and the heavy artillery mage. You even vary the builds of the basic four classes you can mess up that basic order. Its why you play with more than four, since that gives everybody room to work and not have to work for exact dungeoneering.

A monk can be a second fighter and tie up enemies, or slip along with a rogue and back them up if trouble pops. Or is mobile enough to go through the enemies to the caster in the back. It has Evasion and high saves to combat what spells make the Concentration checks.



In terms of simple land speed, yes. But they don't have the ability to fly. Or stop time. And their teleport ability is both somewhat odd and is seldom the best available to the party. They also do have good saves, which would mean a lot more if not for the significant number of spells which do not allow saves.

Who has flying aside from casters? Its why you have archers and long range spells in the first place.

And plenty of spells don't have saves, but most how many are offensive and don't involve a ranged touch attack either? The pickings are slim and high level and I can't even name one off hand aside from the Power Words, plus no saves puts just about everyone in the same boat by definition. So how that is not still a big advantage I don't know.


Yep. Maybe. Depends on the way you play. But what function is the monk filling? I don't have a good answer.

What function to Bards fill? Or even Druids who don't have the same outright offense of mages but no free healing like clerics? Or any number of odd prestige classes? Or people using mind effecting spells when the enemy is undead?

Monks are 5th characters, they are additions and don't have to be absolutely essential.


Seriously, you may not realize it, but that feat is probably the stupidest thing WotC has allowed their people to write up. You can't own any magic items, which in most cases means you don't have the ability to really use them. Potions, especially of healing. Flying magic.

You depend for every need not covered by that feat on the spellcasters in the party. Guess what? If your party doesn't have the full casters, or they refuse to keep helping you for free when you do nothing for them (not everybody wants to play exalted), you have lost access to those things, and the others haven't.


So AC bonuses out the wazoo, damage reduction, energy resistance, making your fists outright magic weapons (damage bonuses), extra feats, stat bonuses, and a few more miscellaneous items isn't immensely magnifying on a class that doesn't rely on items in the first place I really don't see. I mean a human starting right on Vow of Poverty has a +4 AC just in addition to their Wis and Dex at level 1. Generally speaking I don't expect level 1 equipment to be including plate which is what you'd need almost unless someone was playing a Monk without both any Dex and Wis bonus.

Vow of Poverty on a Monk is one of the few feats I've ever seen turned down because it makes the monks completely broken in the eyes of more than a few DMs I've met. Only real thing it lack is strong healing, which the party using anything from Exalted not offering I can't imagine. And when you are doubling a Monks AC on top of all their saves its starts getting harder to imagine monks getting hit at all.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-23, 10:48 PM
Vow of Poverty on a Monk is one of the few feats I've ever seen turned down because it makes the monks completely broken in the eyes of more than a few DMs I've met. Only real thing it lack is strong healing, which the party using anything from Exalted not offering I can't imagine. And when you are doubling a Monks AC on top of all their saves its starts getting harder to imagine monks getting hit at all.

I'll be frank with you: if every monk got VoP as a bonus feat, without having to meet the prerequisites and maintain the vow to keep its effects, it might make the Monk into a better class.

As it is, VoP monks have a very hard time dealing with fundamental concepts of physics. How do you fly without magic? Heal? Get to hard-to-reach locations? Catch up to foes with speeds in excess of 200' a round? Survive a dragon's full-attack? The answer: you can't. VoP isn't as good as it looks for monks. It's good for Totemists, and for Druids (and for the right kind of Cleric), but Monks? Notsomuch.

Zincorium
2007-05-23, 10:59 PM
Heh, I promised myself I wouldn't keep doing these long exchanges, but you and I do seem to have a legitimate set of points we hold in contention.


So in a four PC game is no place for a monk. No big deal there. I mean if you want to get down to it there are four roles right? The melee tank, the support and skill horse rogue, the healer cleric, and the heavy artillery mage. You even vary the builds of the basic four classes you can mess up that basic order. Its why you play with more than four, since that gives everybody room to work and not have to work for exact dungeoneering.


That's not really the point I was trying to make. You have a monk. What is the monk good at? Melee combat. Really, there are few other options, and none which play to the monk's class abilities.

To that end, the monk is a second meleer when added to the 'standard' party of five. So, the monk should, in a reasonably balanced game, be the equal of any other second meleer that the group might add. That is really hard.



A monk can be a second fighter and tie up enemies, or slip along with a rogue and back them up if trouble pops. Or is mobile enough to go through the enemies to the caster in the back. It has Evasion and high saves to combat what spells make the Concentration checks.


Hm, I think you and I differ on what to expect from a mage that's just had a monk roll up and begun to stand and deliver upon them. Mostly, getting completely rid of the monk and/or getting out of range, the 2nd of which is much easier.



Who has flying aside from casters? Its why you have archers and long range spells in the first place.


Anyone who can afford the items or beg a spell from a caster. And other characters can go for archery and ranged spells MUCH easier and with much better results than the monk, who unless you're an elf starts out with only a crossbow as a decent ranged weapon, and that's about as bad a set of options as you can get.



And plenty of spells don't have saves, but most how many are offensive and don't involve a ranged touch attack either? The pickings are slim and high level and I can't even name one off hand aside from the Power Words, plus no saves puts just about everyone in the same boat by definition. So how that is not still a big advantage I don't know.


Never said it wasn't a big advantage, or even implied it was insignificant or the like. But it would be a lot better if it worked against every spell, no? And one really good ability a class does not make. "I have the best overall saves, except at low levels compared to a paladin" should not be the sole claim to fame a character has.



What function to Bards fill? Or even Druids who don't have the same outright offense of mages but no free healing like clerics? Or any number of odd prestige classes? Or people using mind effecting spells when the enemy is undead?


Bard is a caster, if not a full one, is the party 'face', and a wide selection of skills. Druids rock, you have to be really bad to not contribute when playing one. I really don't see how prestige classes fit into this, since by taking a prestige class you are furthering a role you already have. And that last one is just a matter of stupidity.



Monks are 5th characters, they are additions and don't have to be absolutely essential.


Well, they should at least help the party. Non-essential should not mean dead weight, and even then not all players look kindly on someone who they perceive as holding them back or threatening the survival of their character by not being good enough.



So AC bonuses out the wazoo, damage reduction, energy resistance, making your fists outright magic weapons (damage bonuses), extra feats, stat bonuses, and a few more miscellaneous items isn't immensely magnifying on a class that doesn't rely on items in the first place I really don't see. I mean a human starting right on Vow of Poverty has a +4 AC just in addition to their Wis and Dex at level 1. Generally speaking I don't expect level 1 equipment to be including plate which is what you'd need almost unless someone was playing a Monk without both any Dex and Wis bonus.


Vow of poverty at first level requires being a human or other race with a bonus feat and then blowing both feats to get it. So generally you are not going to get too many of those. And what you're missing is that monks generally do rely on items, just not the obvious ones like weapons and armor. A monk without vow of poverty who didn't use things like amulets of mighty fists or bracers of armor is going to be remarkably underpowered.



Vow of Poverty on a Monk is one of the few feats I've ever seen turned down because it makes the monks completely broken in the eyes of more than a few DMs I've met. Only real thing it lack is strong healing, which the party using anything from Exalted not offering I can't imagine. And when you are doubling a Monks AC on top of all their saves its starts getting harder to imagine monks getting hit at all.

Vow of poverty on a druid is broken, on a monk not so. Almost all of the benefits of the vow a monk can get through a decent selection of items, not even thinking up customized ones here. Actually go through the DMG and any other books with magic items you allow and look up what a monk can get using the wealth by level guidelines. If you don't use those, allowing vow of poverty is completely unjustified.

And lets say the monk doesn't get hit. He's still barely better than a non vop monk at doing the only thing he can do, melee combat, and that's a poor fit to begin with.

Indon
2007-05-23, 11:14 PM
As I noted in another thread, VoP goes best with a convenient source of Polymorph; the Monk is already the best core class to polymorph (it removes most of their MAD, they get more class features that are useful in any form such as their speed and unarmed damage, etc), VoP just makes that even more true because the Monk gets to keep all the benefits of their 'gear'.

the_tick_rules
2007-05-23, 11:16 PM
i like the monk.

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-23, 11:21 PM
First edition monks lose 90% of any money and have very poor magic item selection. And must dual to gain lvl's above 8th.
In keeping with that tradition my PoV Monk St. John Bupkis the empty handed is very entertaining for me to play. ( I mostly Dm so letting lose with a Pc is to be taken advantage of.)

The point to any fantasy game is to have FUN! If any of it was realistic, we might just as well play a sim with a rules lawyer:smallfurious:

BTW Balance shmalance. I run my games so my players can be Hero's. At least in their own minds.

So play what you want and if someone else dosn't agree ,fine they don't have to play what your playing. Or how you play. Gaming is one of the few places where being diverse actually accomplishs something.

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-23, 11:24 PM
I think there is a very good role for the monk, actually. It just isn't one most parties actually need. The monk is the rogue's buddy. They get all the stealth and mobility skills, though they aren't so likely to have the int to learn all that they want to. Every bit of infiltration the rogue can do, the monk can very likely follow. Or lead, since how fast you can move stealthily is based on how fast you can move in the first place, and the monk has lots of land speed.

You can't take the rogue out of that team (unless you sub in a beguiler) because you still need trapfinding, lockpicking, and the like. But between rogue+monk and 2xrogue, I'd say the mixed pair has a big edge.

Of course if you've got a normal party, where some members really don't do the whole stealth thing at all, 2-3 party members are sitting out all these exciting adventures in other people's houses. So most likely they never make it into the campaign at all.


And that last one is just a matter of stupidity.
Or being a beguiler. Unless I'm missing something, a beguiler is impressively helpless against undead.

Hectonkhyres
2007-05-24, 01:02 AM
Too many people are playing the endless slaughterfest variety of D&D. Personally, I have always been into the intrigue and strategy-based sort of game where just running in and trying to club your enemies over the head will get you killed every time.

Rather than trying to shatter the enemy's battleaxe with your face, you skirt them and play tactician. Disrupt their supply lines, poison their water and cut throats at night, make sure the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing. Assassinate their leaders and casters and intercept the messangers. Spread dissent throughout the ranks. And damn, things get interesting when the enemy has been fortifying an area for a couple generations.

In the right game the monk can be a god. A blur streaking from rooftop to rooftop, setting a city on fire faster than anyone can stop him. Magical tatoos on his knuckles doing lord knows what with every hit. The odd called shot to jam your entire arm into a dragon's eye or kick the ogre's generative organs into its throat isn't bad either.

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-24, 01:17 AM
Too many people are playing the endless slaughterfest variety of D&D. Personally, I have always been into the intrigue and strategy-based sort of game where just running in and trying to club your enemies over the head will get you killed every time.

Rather than trying to shatter the enemy's battleaxe with your face, you skirt them and play tactician. Disrupt their supply lines, poison their water and cut throats at night, make sure the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing. Assassinate their leaders and casters and intercept the messangers. Spread dissent throughout the ranks. And damn, things get interesting when the enemy has been fortifying an area for a couple generations.

In the right game the monk can be a god. A blur streaking from rooftop to rooftop, setting a city on fire faster than anyone can stop him. Magical tatoos on his knuckles doing lord knows what with every hit. The odd called shot to jam your entire arm into a dragon's eye or kick the ogre's generative organs into its throat isn't bad either.Wait, so you're saying monks are better at what, intrigue? Sorry, no. Plus, all of your examples of monks being "god" in the right kind of campaign...are some kind of homebrew material. Magical tattoos? Monks don't get those. Called shots? Completely not in the rules, and there's no reason a monk should be better at them than another melee class.

Orzel
2007-05-24, 01:21 AM
The problem with the monk is they don't solve problems, they avoid them. Because the only things they can do to the highest limit is sneak, detect, talk, and not die. And they rarely can do all 4 with 1 PC.

When 1 guy avoids a problem, and the others don't; the party gets struck.

So what if the monster can't kill you. There's 3+ other people for him to murder.

Renegade Paladin
2007-05-24, 01:23 AM
Those of you who call the monk weak have obviously never had a character on the receiving end of a grapple with one. It's not the most mechanically powerful base class, but if your opponents are humanoids the monk can do well enough. Large monsters are a problem, but then what do you expect from a guy who's using his fists?

Hectonkhyres
2007-05-24, 01:59 AM
SpiderBrigade: Bah. I hate to tell you this, but damn near everybody's game is homebrew.... though probably not quite as much as mine. Every DM some little thing they leave out or tweak or jam in sideways with ducttape. Every D&D product made can be thought of as convenient guidelines provided to us because we don't have enough time in our lives and/or inspiration to cook up our own game from scratch.

Anything possible in real life (if it had the appropriately warped laws of reality and people of unnatural strength and ability) and much of what isn't can and should be doable in the game. When you start thinking that way, you start to drool over what you can do with a lightning fast warrior who is essentially untouchable and can go anywhere.

In any case, life is more fun when your DM is both flexible, quick on his feet, and willing to pull something original out of the aether once and a while. It doesn't exactly mean having to gut entire classes... just allow certain things to compliment them.

Aquillion
2007-05-24, 02:24 AM
Those of you who call the monk weak have obviously never had a character on the receiving end of a grapple with one.Um, what? Where does all this about monk grappling keep coming from? Monks aren't especially good at grappling. They have 3/4 BAB. They can get Improved Grapple as a free feat. They're good at unarmed combat if they can keep winning those grapple checks. That's it. Most of their abilities won't help them once a grapple actually starts. Their absurd MAD means they probably won't even have that great strength... if they try to grapple with a fighter who has chosen to work on grapples or just about any full BAB STR-focused class, they'll get torn from limb to limb in short order as they repeatedly fail the grapple checks. Assuming they don't take improved grapple or their target does, their grapple checks are on even ground with clerics and, of all things, rogues (and clerics have Freedom of Movement while rogues have escape artist checks, if they don't want to be grappled.)

Yes, they can grapple with a wizard and win. You know who else can grapple with a wizard and win? Anyone. A commoner is likely to have more STR than a wizard, and with their equal BAB can grapple quite effectively... when you say your monk is a wizard-grappler, you're essentially admitting that they're about as useful as a commoner. That's why casters are always going to be flying, mounted, behind some sort of protective field, invisible, or (more likely) all of the above... any DM who gives the PCs a humanoid caster opponent who they can just walk up to and grapple isn't, well, trying too hard in the challenge department.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:28 AM
Huh, yet another monk thread? Guess it will always be so unless I manage to provide an answer to the following:



That's what is missing: a solid role that no one except the monk, or another monk-like class, can perform. The problem is it doesn't exist by default.


The monk has a solid role. He is the ultimate casterbane and has the abilities to do it, at all levels. For those abilities (like flying, if it is really needed. Jump is just fine in the typical dungeons) he does not have he'll get the appropriate items.

At low levels, he has the best saves (an elf monk can easily have +9 vs enchantment at 3rd level!) and the stunning fist ability (the DC can easily rise to the 30s at high levels!), which should flatten every wizard or sorcerer (use that rather than grapple; use maxed escape artist vs opponent grapple attempts). Divine casters at that level are not that much of a threat yet.
Additionally, the monk is the least dependent on equipment, except maybe druids (he does not need any weapons, great when being captured or in social events where you normally do not carry weapons).

At high levels, the monk is simply the best class for antimagic field tactics, in particular since his movement and stunning fist remain unaffected.

As for providing help to other classes: he has a bunch of supernatural abilities that cannot be dispelled or countered (like dimension door, which he can use to bring along other party members as well).
Stunning fist offers sneak attacking opportunities for the rogue. His resilience to disease, poison, spells in general (spell resistance alone from 13th level onward means around 45% chance of each incoming spell to not affect him, including power words) poison, best touch ACs and evasion mean that an enemy possibly wastes the attack on him (he does not need to appear as a monk! Get a simple hat of disguise and you're fine in most situations). At the very least, it frees party spells to help the others.
His speed makes him the ideal scout (for tactical situations, as opposed to the ranger for wilderness and the rogue for urban situations).
His speed also makes him the most versatile for non-magical battlefield control purposes.

As a bonus, the class is not the clear cut kung fu style monk- although he could be turned into that. It is more general in nature, so that you could easily interpret him to be a scholar, merchant, Indiana jones adventurer, medieval boxing champion, Greek antique style athlete, rogui-sh style guy, bodyguard, inquisition mage hunter, and what have you.

- Giacomo

Aquillion
2007-05-24, 02:31 AM
At low levels, he has the best saves (an elf monk can easily have +9 vs enchantment at 3rd level!) and the stunning fist ability (the DC can easily rise to the 30s!), which should flatten every wizard or sorcerer (use that rather than grapple; use maxed escape artist vs opponent grapple attempts). Divine casters at that level are not that much of a threat yet.
Additionally, the monk is the least dependent on equipment, except maybe druids (he does not need any weapons, great when being captured or in social events where you normally do not carry weapons).

At high levels, the monk is simply the best class for antimagic field tactics, in particular since his movement and stunning fist remain unaffected....so, in other words, your argument is that the monk is good at beating up mages at 3rd level, when they're awful, or inside anti-magic fields, when they can't fight back... once again proving that the monk's most vaunted purposes can be accomplished, almost, by a commoner with good STR.

You know who else can beat up casters in those situations? Fighters. Sure, they don't have the great saves, but who cares? A caster above 4th level who is casting spells doesn't need to hit your saves to keep you from punching him in the face. They cast fly, you cry.

Assuming they don't have good spells or they're in an AMF, a fighter can win by the simple expedient of cutting them into really really small pieces. Stunning fist isn't really all that hot by comparison.

A monk's lack of dependancy on equipment is yet another of the Great Monk Myths. In fact, a monk is more dependant on equipment than other classes, not less. They absolutely need to be high in a huge number of stats to work effectively. What does that mean? You got it, magic items. They also need, later on, flying abilities and, in general, some way to get close to opponents in difficult terrain so they can use their close-range attacks. Aside from one dimension door per day, all of this has to come from magic items, and without it they're going to be useless a significent percentage of the time.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:35 AM
...so, in other words, your argument is that the monk is good at beating up mages at 3rd level, whne they're awful, or inside anti-magic fields, when they can't fight back... once again proving that the monk's most vaunted purposes can be accomplished, almost, by a commoner with good STR.

But the commoner does not have the movement. He does not have the defenses against magic when AMF is not up. Need I really list all the stuff a monk does better than commoner?

- Giacomo

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-24, 02:36 AM
Those of you who call the monk weak have obviously never had a character on the receiving end of a grapple with one. It's not the most mechanically powerful base class, but if your opponents are humanoids the monk can do well enough. Large monsters are a problem, but then what do you expect from a guy who's using his fists?

But the monk is not a particularily good grappler, either, compared to characters who have a full Base Attack Bonus and can afford a higher Strength.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:38 AM
You know who else can beat up casters in those situations? Fighters. Sure, they don't have the great saves, but who cares? A caster above 4th level who is casting spells doesn't need to hit your saves to keep you from punching him in the face. They cast fly, you cry.

Assuming they don't have good spells or they're in an AMF, a fighter can win by the simple expedient of cutting them into really really small pieces. Stunning fist isn't really all that hot by comparison.

You are correct that fighters are also quite powerful at combating casters. However, they also depend on magical equipment to be able to fly. Plus their style is different and their defenses are much weaker vs casters.
Especially at high levels, non-casters can be quite sure that casters will have the initiative and/or are difficult to surprise. The fighter is balanced vs the monk because he has the better sheer damage output and more feats for some different uses (like archery, for instance). However, the monk has better defenses and also more skills/skill points for other stuff.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:39 AM
But the monk is not a particularily good grappler, either, compared to characters who have a full Base Attack Bonus and can afford a higher Strength.

The monk does not need to grapple. He could do it, but the full BAB classes are better (probably the fighter is best, because he has the most feats to spare for unarmed combat).

The best route for the monk is improved unarmed strike/stunning fist. Then he can make use of high WIS scores in more ways than for spot/listen/willsave and AC.

- Giacomo

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-24, 02:43 AM
As an ability for player characters, Stunning Fist is not particularily efficacious. It targets the most commonly high save among monsters (and NPCs), you can miss with it and it is still used up, and it stuns for one round while being limited-use.

Stunning Fist does not make a monk a viable frontliner--it takes quite a bit of sometimes fairly complex optimization to do that.

Aquillion
2007-05-24, 02:45 AM
Especially at high levels, non-casters can be quite sure that casters will have the initiative and/or are difficult to surprise. The fighter is balanced vs the monk because he has the better sheer damage output and more feats for some different uses (like archery, for instance). However, the monk has better defenses and also more skills/skill points for other stuff.Except that casters don't need to pass your saves to protect themselves. Reliably keeping people from getting close enough to punch you is casting 101, and with only a single dimension door per day (as a standard action, so you can't do anything when you arrive) and a slightly high land movement speed, the only way a monk is ever going to get a chance to do anything next to a mage is if the rest of the party helps set it up or the DM decides to let them.

A monk's high saves are only useful if the caster needs to completely kill or disable them quickly... and, well, casters don't. Monks can't fly; they can only get past a barrier once per day; they can't see invisible, they can't escape Solid Fog without blowing their one shot (which, recall, they can't do anything after using in that round), etc, etc, etc. An evil NPC spellcasting human can easily disable or avoid the monk and slaughter the rest of the party before overcoming the monk's saves at their leisure.

And don't forget that the rest of the party's low saves can come back to haunt you in other ways. You have high saves, so what? The evil mage wouldn't have targetted you anyway. Charm the fighter, order him to hit you the cleric or wizard with his sword, yawn, teleport away.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-24, 02:47 AM
One can deal with a monk by summoning a grappling monster, as it will be a better grappler than the monk and therefore consume his brains.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:47 AM
A monk's lack of dependancy on equipment is yet another of the Great Monk Myths. In fact, a monk is more dependant on equipment than other classes, not less. They absolutely need to be high in a huge number of stats to work effectively. What does that mean? You got it, magic items. They also need, later on, flying abilities and, in general, some way to get close to opponents in difficult terrain so they can use their close-range attacks. Aside from one dimension door per day, all of this has to come from magic items, and without it they're going to be useless a significent percentage of the time.

I guess the myth is rather on the "aww...monks are so underpowered and useless" side. They are highly useful.

They have less need of equipment than other classes because all of their abilities and great saves make it less necessary for them to have
- rings of evasion
- save boosters
- dimension dooring ability (to get out of tentacles, solid fog and other tight spots)
- armour and weapons
- poison and disease immunitis
- even healing they can do themselves to some extent (other non-divine casters will need at least some potions of healing)
- there is not even an item that grants the same power of spell resistance
- likewise, there is not an item that grants the same base speed eventually
well, I'll stop here. Hope you get where I am going...:smallsmile:

All of this means, that the monk does not need to use his wealth per level to get the bare minimum of some must-haves (although he could still get them ONTOP of his formidable class abilities). Compare the rogue with boots of speed...and then the monk with the same. Or both with cloak of resistance +5...
Monks can INSTEAD focus more on stat-enhancers, of which he can make more versatile use than most other clases (since he is, er, MAD...)

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:49 AM
One can deal with a monk by summoning a grappling monster, as it will be a better grappler than the monk and therefore consume his brains.

A maxed escape artist plus cheap salve of slipperiness will put a stop to that monster's consumption wish, I'm afraid :smallbiggrin: Grappling, in particular at high levels (freedom of movement anyone?) is quite a bad combat tactics. Vs the monk, likely already at low levels.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:51 AM
As an ability for player characters, Stunning Fist is not particularily efficacious. It targets the most commonly high save among monsters (and NPCs), you can miss with it and it is still used up, and it stuns for one round while being limited-use.

Stunning Fist does not make a monk a viable frontliner--it takes quite a bit of sometimes fairly complex optimization to do that.

But...stunning fist is not for the high fort monsters (let the others of the party do that). I never said that the monk can do EVERYTHING. His role is to combat enemy casters. And that he does best.

- Giacomo

Aquillion
2007-05-24, 02:53 AM
All of this means, that the monk does not need to use his wealth per level to get the bare minimum of some must-haves (although he could still get them ONTOP of his formidable class abilities). Compare the rogue with boots of speed...and then the monk with the same. Or both with cloak of resistance +5...
Monks can INSTEAD focus more on stat-enhancers, of which he can make more versatile use than most other clases (since he is, er, MAD...)Except that he is, basically, relying on those stat-enhancers to let his basic class abilities work at all. Without them, he'll either suck as a combatant (15 BAB, mediocre STR?), lose his good saves, lose that precious AC (exposing his lowish HP), lose the DC on his special attacks, or all of the above. A fighter with a non-magical sword is still a fighter, with 20 BAB and their feat path; a rogue without boots of speed can still sneak attack. A monk who loses their stat-enhancers, by comparison, is likely to have several key class features shut down near-completely.

And you didn't answer the real question. Any melee class (or even partial-melee class) that gets next to a caster can make short work of them. Given that casters don't need to rely in hitting your saves or touch AC just to protect themselves, and given that one dimension door / day or a slightly high land speed is just not going to be enough, what do monks have that allows them to get next to decent-level casters? After they've spent that one shot of boundless stride, how do they get past the basic, basic defenses of walls, flight, solid fog, teleportation, invisibility, etc. that every caster is going to pull? Please don't say magic items.

The answer is nothing. Monks are no good at fighting casters at all. They just get the reputation because they're even worse at everything else.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-24, 03:01 AM
A maxed escape artist plus cheap salve of slipperiness will put a stop to that monster's consumption wish, I'm afraid :smallbiggrin: Grappling, in particular at high levels (freedom of movement anyone?) is quite a bad combat tactics. Vs the monk, likely already at low levels.

- Giacomo
Why would the monk, who likely has Improved Grapple, have Escape Artist? I have never seen anyone purchase Salve of Slipperiness, either. In any case, grappling monsters (such as a giant crocodile) can also fight in melee.
At low levels, the monk is not particularily a good grappler, with his low BAB and strength. A monster can be quite good.


But...stunning fist is not for the high fort monsters (let the others of the party do that). I never said that the monk can do EVERYTHING. His role is to combat enemy casters. And that he does best.

- Giacomo
But... being somewhat better at fighting a very specific kind of rare enemy is not a party role. If it is the only thing he is competent at, that speaks very poorly of the class.
In any case, would a spellcaster not be better at combating enemy spellcasters, and everything else as well?

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 03:32 AM
Sorry, double post due to server slowdown.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 03:35 AM
In my view, there is so much wrong with the following comments that it bears dealing with them one-by-one...
Before @FourthTempter:
1) you can either take improved grapple or stunning fist. The latter is better. Salve of Slipperiness gives +20 to escape artist for 8 hours and immunity to web effects. This can be quite critical at low levels.
2) the monk is better at combating casters than even other casters because he can make use of an AMF up around him, which casters cannot do without crippling themselves. A wizard may use this tactics vs another wizard if he knows he is physically superior and can beat him in hand-to-hand combat. But otherwise...
Casters vs other casters of same level tend to run into either an impasse (dispels/counter/Abjurations etc.) or will depend on going first.


Except that casters don't need to pass your saves to protect themselves.

? No class does that. I do not understand. Saves are defensive in nature. You have the best saves (like the monk has in core), you are best in that. If saves are most often needed vs spells, you are the best vs spellusers in that aspect. There is no arguing around it.


Reliably keeping people from getting close enough to punch you is casting 101, and with only a single dimension door per day (as a standard action, so you can't do anything when you arrive) and a slightly high land movement speed, the only way a monk is ever going to get a chance to do anything next to a mage is if the rest of the party helps set it up or the DM decides to let them.

What kind of DM would that be? Allowing casters to automatically succeed at everything?
First of all, the above problems are there for all non-caster classes, but the monk has the best ways to avoid them.
Second, the dim-door problem is shared by all who use it, whether from spell (including the quickend version), or item, or class ability. So it proves nothing. It still is a good thing to escape. It should never be used for offense (neither by spellcasters).
Third, there are so many ways to obstruct spellcasters and foil their power, even as non-casters, that I should try to do some sort of Anti-LogicNinja'sGuide-Thread somewhere, because I see it so often ignored on this board. Suffice to say that movement is king in all combat, and casters need most often distance to their opponents to work best. Yes, there are many ways to stop an attacker, but yes, there are as many ways to bypass a caster's defenses.



A monk's high saves are only useful if the caster needs to completely kill or disable them quickly... and, well, casters don't.

They don't? Well, casters can be played defensively, but then they are likely to lose in the long run since they run out of spells/need to refresh spells, while the monk needs not to refresh his class abilities (except the rare perday-abilities).


Monks can't fly;

No class can. Even spellusers have to get the spell and CAST it. That may be countered, dispelled, not last that long etc. Even overland flight is not that great, since it allows only movement of 40ft. If a caster flies up, that speed is halved. Guess whose jump (boosted virutally sky-high due to high movement) is going to catch that caster? Here, a grapple may be useful, but a stunning fist is much better.
Plus, due to the reasons I outlined above in another post, the monk has most gold to spare for fly and other items of all non-caster classes, because he has most class abilities.


they can only get past a barrier once per day;

ontop of all stuff they get via equipment.


they can't see invisible,

they have spot and listen as class abilities, plus high WIS most of the time. If they get some kind of obscuring mist effect up, this levels the playing field with blind-fight feat immensly :smallbiggrin: And, of course, they could get see invisibility via an item more easily than other non-casters who need to buy their armour, weapons, protection material first.


they can't escape Solid Fog without blowing their one shot (which, recall, they can't do anything after using in that round), etc, etc, etc.

If all fails, a freedom of movement ring (which they can afford more than other classes) in the mid-levels greatly helps the monk. Could then replace the less reliable low-level salve of slipperiness outlined above.


An evil NPC spellcasting human can easily disable or avoid the monk and slaughter the rest of the party before overcoming the monk's saves at their leisure.

But, you see, this is where the great saves, touch AC, Hide, move silently and movement come in handy. He can't disable the monk "easily". This is where the monk excels.


And don't forget that the rest of the party's low saves can come back to haunt you in other ways. You have high saves, so what? The evil mage wouldn't have targetted you anyway. Charm the fighter, order him to hit you the cleric or wizard with his sword, yawn, teleport away.

Yep, but what if the monk with hat of disguise (or seeming spell from the party wizard if you do not have one ready) poses as a fighter in plate mail or a brute barbarian? Who then wastes his prescious spells trying to charm him vs still mind? :smallsmile: And, btw, charm does not work that way...you cannot order your best friend to attack his friends...for this, you need a carefully worded suggestion or a dominate person effect overcoming one will save per round.

On to the next post...


Except that he is, basically, relying on those stat-enhancers to let his basic class abilities work at all. Without them, he'll either suck as a combatant (15 BAB, mediocre STR?), lose his good saves, lose that precious AC (exposing his lowish HP), lose the DC on his special attacks, or all of the above. A fighter with a non-magical sword is still a fighter, with 20 BAB and their feat path; a rogue without boots of speed can still sneak attack. A monk who loses their stat-enhancers, by comparison, is likely to have several key class features shut down near-completely.

The only stat that really thrives for the monk's class abilities is Wisdom. All other stats he can make use of like the other classes do. So basically he needs to max his WIS score (as the divine classes). That's it. Dexterity should be the second-highest stat (combine with weapon finesse feat). Which is incidently the best combination for all classes to survive in high-level play vs magic-using opponents.
He does not "lose" his good saves without items (actually you never lose your base saves). Without items, all non-casters suck at high level play (although the monk less so since he got the most class abilities, extraordinary and superantural all proof to dispels, counters and AoO).



And you didn't answer the real question.

I guess I did by now, but on to your last comment in detail:


Any melee class (or even partial-melee class) that gets next to a caster can make short work of them.

Not in all cases. Stoneskin (which does only protect vs stunning fist or grapple in a limited way), Mirror Image (against which the monk can disbelieve best), Contingencies, Resilient Sphere come to mind.


Given that casters don't need to rely in hitting your saves or touch AC just to protect themselves, and given that one dimension door / day or a slightly high land speed is just not going to be enough, what do monks have that allows them to get next to decent-level casters? After they've spent that one shot of boundless stride, how do they get past the basic, basic defenses of walls, flight, solid fog, teleportation, invisibility, etc. that every caster is going to pull? Please don't say magic items.

No problem. The answer is simple: movement. It even works while the monk has an AMF up. And why shouldn't magic items be included? Everyone in the game has access to magic, only the spellcasters on a regular spell basis, the others via other means.


The answer is nothing. Monks are no good at fighting casters at all. They just get the reputation because they're even worse at everything else.

Wrong. As I have shown above.

- Giacomo

F.L.
2007-05-24, 03:37 AM
Why would the monk, who likely has Improved Grapple, have Escape Artist? I have never seen anyone purchase Salve of Slipperiness, either. In any case, grappling monsters (such as a giant crocodile) can also fight in melee.


Well, if you're dealing with an especially dumb build, such as a halfling monk, you'd probably forego Imp. Grapple, and go escape artist all the way, due to naturally having a -5 to grapple on top of everything else. And it might not be a completely stupid build for a LA+0 anthropomorphic bat (Savage Species) with -4Str, +6 Wis, flying speed, and stunning fist/intuitive attack.

Edit: Does intuitive attack even work with unarmed strikes?

greenknight
2007-05-24, 04:06 AM
On that note, why not? Short of creatures you'd never be allowed to play, I've never seen claw attacks that can do more damage than the 2d10 (or even 4d8 with improved natural attack...which would only apply to a monk's natural form) anyway.

The main reason is to avoid 1 level dip abuse. For example, a Druid who takes 1 level of Monk, then wildshaping into an Elephant and trying to get a slam and two stamps off as a standard action.


the monk is better at combating casters than even other casters because he can make use of an AMF up around him, which casters cannot do without crippling themselves.

The problem is getting that AMF up in the first place. It can be done through a scroll or an (expensive) ring of spell storing, but it's not something a Monk can pull off by him or her self, unless the Monk is also a high level spellcaster.


If saves are most often needed vs spells, you are the best vs spellusers in that aspect.

Again, the issue is that there are many spells which bypass saving throws, and optimized spellcasters are going to concentrate on them.


What kind of DM would that be? Allowing casters to automatically succeed at everything?

For a Wizard, there's Phantom Steed or Overland Flight, both of which essentially allow a high level spellcaster to fly all day. And a Phantom Steed can fly around with a move of 240 feet (14th level caster), which is much better than anything a Monk gets.


Suffice to say that movement is king in all combat, and casters need most often distance to their opponents to work best.

You've forgotten my Cleric already? :smallwink: Wizards and Sorcerers tend to need distance, Clerics and Druids are fine when they get up close and personal.


If they get some kind of obscuring mist effect up, this levels the playing field with blind-fight feat immensly

Even in Core only games, this only works until the spellcaster summons a creature with blindsight. In non-Core games, a Cleric or Druid can just cast the Blindsight spell (from Spell Compendium) to get 30' (or 60') Blindsight for 1 minute/level.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 04:21 AM
Ah, greenknight joins the fray, great!:smallbiggrin:



The problem is getting that AMF up in the first place. It can be done through a scroll or an (expensive) ring of spell storing, but it's not something a Monk can pull off by him or her self, unless the Monk is also a high level spellcaster.


The monk can "pull it off" by himself via UMD and scroll, but it's tricky. However, at high level play, the monk can focus wealth he saves in other aspects for shoring up UMD to cast it in divine version from a scroll (his WIS is definitely high enough even for 9th level spells, and he can get to the critical UMD bonus of 30 without that much expenditure; actually, since AMF lasts quite long, he can give it several tries to activate the scroll with a lower UMD). The ring of spell storing may be too expensive and rare, you are correct.



Again, the issue is that there are many spells which bypass saving throws, and optimized spellcasters are going to concentrate on them.


Yes, but how many are there that will bypass all of the stellar save bonuses, his spell resistance AND a ring of freedom of movement? Not that many. Even summoned creatures from casters of the same level as the monk can be bypassed easily with his tumble and movement (with AMF, they would just wink out). And if he manages to trick the spellcaster into believing that he is not a monk (quite easily done), then a non-optimal spell (against him) is cast into his direction.
Using gate (a called creature where AMF does not help) is an option from lvl 17 and up, but that is the most powerful attack in the game vs all classes.


For a Wizard, there's Phantom Steed or Overland Flight, both of which essentially allow a high level spellcaster to fly all day. And a Phantom Steed can fly around with a move of 240 feet (14th level caster), which is much better than anything a Monk gets.

Overland flight is lame due to the stuff I outlined above (too slow way up vs the monk's jump), and phantom steed needs one hit (missile or melee) and evaporates.


You've forgotten my Cleric already? :smallwink: Wizards and Sorcerers tend to need distance, Clerics and Druids are fine when they get up close and personal.

Oh, no (shudders still in awe :smalleek: ), I have not forgotten the cleric. The monk vs CoDzilla is admittedly the wrong opponent (he could use his great movement or dim door to flee, though!). My old fighter was much better :smallcool:


Even in Core only games, this only works until the spellcaster summons a creature with blindsight. In non-Core games, a Cleric or Druid can just cast the Blindsight spell (from Spell Compendium) to get 30' (or 60') Blindsight for 1 minute/level.

Blindsight helps the summoned monsters, but as outlined above already, summoned monster of the same caster level as the monk are quite weak against him (in particular since their other combat abilities will be weaker due to the blindsight advantages) and likely will not stop his superior movement from reaching the caster (who is still blind/can't see).

- Giacomo

Funkyodor
2007-05-24, 04:27 AM
Well, I've read the posts and my $.02 is that the monk does better played like a rogue, than as a fighter.

4 basic types of group functions: smacker, caster, sneaker, healer

smacker: Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, etc...
caster: Wizard, Sorceror, etc...
healer: Cleric, uh..., etc...
sneaker: Rogue, Monk, etc...

Misc: Druid and Bard can fit in multiple groups depending on what spells are ready or what the player wants to fit in.

The rogue and monk typically have gear equipped that allows little to no move silently or hide penalty. And, as mentioned before, compliment each other well. Stunning blow does jack for the monk by himself (oOo you get to act normally right before I do, Wow that stunn was really powerful for a high BAB req. Feat), but does wonders for the Rogue ally. High monk move and some ranks in tumble lets the monk get the flank while the Rogue can full attack freely. 80' to 100' charging trip or grapple lets him get stragglers or people trying to flee. Then back to sneaking around with the Rogue.

So what, Monk is more a support class than a stand alone specific class. Weakness or Strength is in the eye of the beholder. Is maximizing your support capability a weakness? Because as a Monk you won't do insane damage or cast some impressive and sometimes mis-read spells, but you will help the rest of the group do what they do better. If you don't, and actually hinder the group, you'd be an 'an-' not 'pro-' tagonist.

Time for lunch.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-24, 05:08 AM
In my view, there is so much wrong with the following comments that it bears dealing with them one-by-one...
Before @FourthTempter:
1) you can either take improved grapple or stunning fist. The latter is better. Salve of Slipperiness gives +20 to escape artist for 8 hours and immunity to web effects. This can be quite critical at low levels.
So your monks all carry Salve of Slipperiness and apply it daily in case of grapples? Truly? Despite the fact that it costs a thousand gold, and if one has a thousand gold spare at low levels, one saves for an attribute-increasing item, a weapon, a Cloak of Resistance, a Ring of Protection, or some other such item?
My apologies, but I simply can not bring myself to believe that that is how you expend your wealth, even if it were level-inappropriate enough to allow you to throw away a thousand gold pieces a day.
Escape Artist alone will not enough--a Huge monstrous centipede, availible via Summon Monster III, receives a +15 on grapple checks; the Lion availible via Summon Monster IV has +12 and Improved Grab (although it is likely better off meleeing) (alternatively, 1d3 of the aforementioned Monstrous Centipedes may be summoned).


2) the monk is better at combating casters than even other casters because he can make use of an AMF up around him, which casters cannot do without crippling themselves. A wizard may use this tactics vs another wizard if he knows he is physically superior and can beat him in hand-to-hand combat. But otherwise...
Casters vs other casters of same level tend to run into either an impasse (dispels/counter/Abjurations etc.) or will depend on going first.
A caster can make use of an Antimagic Field against spellcasters if he is a "gish"--an Eldritch Knight build gaining access to Antimagic Field the regular way is going to be far more effective both in melee and against spellcasters than a monk, and a core Eldritch Knight build is not exactly thrillingly powerful except insofar as it can cast spells.
As for antimagic fields themselves--I beg your pardon? Where does a monk acquire an Antimagic Field? Use Magic Device is not a class skill. At level 20, the monk will have eleven ranks, and Charisma is typically a low attribute for monks.

And even should some hypothetical high-Charisma monk wearing a Circlet of Persuasion and who has expended a feat on Skill Focus: Use Magic Device have a supply of Antimagic Field scrolls and use them against spellcasters... how does the monk reach the flying spellcaster once the monk himself is in an antimagic field?

Spellcasters can combat other spellcasters. An eleventh-level spellcaster can cast Antimagic Field--or he could cast Greater Dispel Magic, dispel the enemy's flight, and allow the party's druid to Pounce upon the fellow. Alternatively, he could utilize Baleful Polymorph and force a Fortitude save. A spellcaster can see invisible spellcasters (and reveal them with Glitterdust), he can target the other spellcaster without having to achieve melee proximity, and he can protect himself against incoming spells as well as emply (Greater) Dispel Magic. In other words, a spellcaster has all of the tools that would allow him to combat other spellcasters. A spellcaster facing a spellcaster of equal level has a one in two chance of losing, all else being equal--that is as it should be. A spellcaster in a party will allow his party to prevail. A monk... well, frankly, I am unsure as to what exactly you think a monk will do. Win initiative, charge (via a flying item), and then attempt to apply a Stunning Fist?

From what I have seen of your posts, you seem to take nearly negligible weaknesses of strong classes and do your best to blow them out of proportion, and take nearly negligible strengths of weak classes and attempt to do the same. This may or may not be commendable, but it is hardly looking at the situation realistically.


Third, there are so many ways to obstruct spellcasters and foil their power, even as non-casters, that I should try to do some sort of Anti-LogicNinja'sGuide-Thread somewhere, because I see it so often ignored on this board. Suffice to say that movement is king in all combat, and casters need most often distance to their opponents to work best. Yes, there are many ways to stop an attacker, but yes, there are as many ways to bypass a caster's defenses.
There are surprisingly few--it requires a highly specialized character or a series of specific items, as well as good luck and generally initiative. In real games it is not impossible, but there is a reason that in one of my games, the monk has come close to death repeatedly, whereas the (competent, but not hyper-optimized) wizard has not had hit point damage dealt to him in the last four sessions. Our enemies have included archers, fighters, monks, an assortment of melee monsters, spellcasters, and more.


They don't? Well, casters can be played defensively, but then they are likely to lose in the long run since they run out of spells/need to refresh spells, while the monk needs not to refresh his class abilities (except the rare perday-abilities).
Long-lasting spells such as Overland Flight and teleporting away from danger are common defensive-spellcaster tactics. They are not a significant resource drain.


No class can. Even spellusers have to get the spell and CAST it. That may be countered, dispelled, not last that long etc. Even overland flight is not that great, since it allows only movement of 40ft. If a caster flies up, that speed is halved. Guess whose jump (boosted virutally sky-high due to high movement) is going to catch that caster? Here, a grapple may be useful, but a stunning fist is much better.
Plus, due to the reasons I outlined above in another post, the monk has most gold to spare for fly and other items of all non-caster classes, because he has most class abilities.
Druids can fly, as a matter of fact--but having easy access to Fly and Overland Flight is vastly superior to having Boots of Flying thrice a day or shelling out the money for a Cloak of Wings (after your Ring of Freedom of Movement, presumably... my, that's a hundred thousand already).
I am unsure as to how leaping and attacking works, but Stunning Fist is entirely negated by critical immunity. If the monk has a Ring of Freedom of Movement, and attribute increasers, the spellcaster has a Mage's Body Ward, a +1 Mithral buckler of Heavy Fortification. That, or he may well make the saving throw. Even if he does not--the caster is stunned... in midair. The monk falls. The next round the monk may miss, or the save may be made, and the monk does little damage per hit.


ontop of all stuff they get via equipment.
Which is what, exactly? Monks requiring less equipment is a myth. Instead of a weapon, they have to pay for a more-expensive amulet of mighty fists; they require more attribute boosters; they require items to boost their Armor Class that are more expensive than armor doing the same; they require Freedom of Movement and Flight the same as everyone else does... at what level, precisely, does the monk have Freedom of Movement, Flight, all of his attribute boosters, and so on? What did he do before then? What do other classes have?


they have spot and listen as class abilities, plus high WIS most of the time. If they get some kind of obscuring mist effect up, this levels the playing field with blind-fight feat immensly :smallbiggrin: And, of course, they could get see invisibility via an item more easily than other non-casters who need to buy their armour, weapons, protection material first.
The monk requires an Amulet of Natural Attacks, he requires armor class boosteres (Bracers of Armor are traditional), he requires more attribute boosters... now he is also spending a feat on Blind-Fight and purchasing a Horn of Fog, spending his actions blowing his own horn (so, a-heh, to speak)? I can not particularily picture the monk you are describing as being effective in any given situation.


If all fails, a freedom of movement ring (which they can afford more than other classes) in the mid-levels greatly helps the monk. Could then replace the less reliable low-level salve of slipperiness outlined above.
That is one of the great items of the game, yes.


But, you see, this is where the great saves, touch AC, Hide, move silently and movement come in handy. He can't disable the monk "easily". This is where the monk excels.
The monk excels at surviving, providing he avoids melee, yes. That is not a party role. He is more difficult to disable than other classes (again, with the above qualifier)... but he contributes next to nothing.


Yep, but what if the monk with hat of disguise (or seeming spell from the party wizard if you do not have one ready) poses as a fighter in plate mail or a brute barbarian? Who then wastes his prescious spells trying to charm him vs still mind? :smallsmile: And, btw, charm does not work that way...you cannot order your best friend to attack his friends...for this, you need a carefully worded suggestion or a dominate person effect overcoming one will save per round.
What if the wizard poses as a fighter in plate mail while traveling? If the monk poses as a fighter, he will not clank as an armored fighter will, so it ought to be trivial to notice something being amiss--but if he is believed to be a fighter, he will simply be dismissed.


The only stat that really thrives for the monk's class abilities is Wisdom. All other stats he can make use of like the other classes do. So basically he needs to max his WIS score (as the divine classes). That's it. Dexterity should be the second-highest stat (combine with weapon finesse feat). Which is incidently the best combination for all classes to survive in high-level play vs magic-using opponents.
He does not "lose" his good saves without items (actually you never lose your base saves). Without items, all non-casters suck at high level play (although the monk less so since he got the most class abilities, extraordinary and superantural all proof to dispels, counters and AoO).

A high-Wisdom, high-Dexerity monk seems like a good idea but will be utterly incapable of melee combat. A good Fortitude save with a mediocre Constitution score will still mean failing those saves regularly, by the way.




No problem. The answer is simple: movement. It even works while the monk has an AMF up. And why shouldn't magic items be included? Everyone in the game has access to magic, only the spellcasters on a regular spell basis, the others via other means.

Inside an antimagic field the monk can not fly, so his movement speed is irrelevant (and a charge should close the distance whether one is a monk or not).

Arbitrarity
2007-05-24, 07:23 AM
Yay, I'm a monk in an AMF! I can own those casters...

Wait... why is the wizard up 40 ft in the air...

I'm the monk, I can make a DC 120 jump check! Then the wizard falls!

Wheeeeewwwwww*splat*.

Damn, let's try that again!

Wheeeeeewwwwww*splat*.

Nyah nyah, you cant touch... me.

*Wizard sticks monk in a box of stone*

Now, let's see how long your AMF lasts...

Haha! Foolish wizard, I can use... abundant step... which is Su...

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 07:31 AM
OK, this is going to be long. But once again, imo there are so many misconceptions in fourth tempter's post that I have to reply in detail.


So your monks all carry Salve of Slipperiness and apply it daily in case of grapples? Truly? Despite the fact that it costs a thousand gold, and if one has a thousand gold spare at low levels, one saves for an attribute-increasing item, a weapon, a Cloak of Resistance, a Ring of Protection, or some other such item?

You see, the salve of slipperiness only takes a standard action to apply (and this cannot be stopped by a grapple). So you carry it just in case; maybe a couple of doses.


My apologies, but I simply can not bring myself to believe that that is how you expend your wealth, even if it were level-inappropriate enough to allow you to throw away a thousand gold pieces a day.
Escape Artist alone will not enough--a Huge monstrous centipede, availible via Summon Monster III, receives a +15 on grapple checks; the Lion availible via Summon Monster IV has +12 and Improved Grab (although it is likely better off meleeing) (alternatively, 1d3 of the aforementioned Monstrous Centipedes may be summoned).

The monsters you quote at those levels can be overcome easily with escape artist (at 5th level, maxed to 8 ranks; +2 DEX bonus, +20 salve = +30). However, how often are those monsters going to attack the monk?
Do not forget that
- if met in dungeons, the monk will spot/listen (WIS is high for monks, plus class skill) it before the monster does, plus has better initiative modifier (improved initiative feat is a no-brainer for all characters to be ahead of many (and most low-level) monsters in that respect). Even a monk could have range weapons - but likely the rest of the party will eliminate the centipede from afar already (possibly warned by the monk to its presence)
- if cast as spell, that summoning spell takes 1 round. In that round, a lot will happen, especially with Mr. Casterbane the monk. That stunning fist will disrupt the 1 round casting automatically, you know?



A caster can make use of an Antimagic Field against spellcasters if he is a "gish"--an Eldritch Knight build gaining access to Antimagic Field the regular way is going to be far more effective both in melee and against spellcasters than a monk, and a core Eldritch Knight build is not exactly thrillingly powerful except insofar as it can cast spells.
As for antimagic fields themselves--I beg your pardon? Where does a monk acquire an Antimagic Field? Use Magic Device is not a class skill. At level 20, the monk will have eleven ranks, and Charisma is typically a low attribute for monks.
And even should some hypothetical high-Charisma monk wearing a Circlet of Persuasion and who has expended a feat on Skill Focus: Use Magic Device have a supply of Antimagic Field scrolls and use them against spellcasters... how does the monk reach the flying spellcaster once the monk himself is in an antimagic field?

UMD is entirely sufficient. By the time AMF is available to casters (11th level), the monk can cast it (divine version) easily with:
UMD maxed cross-class to 7 ranks; possible synergy bonus from cross-class spellcraft +2 (spellcraft is a must have for all, even cross-class), skill focus +3 (the monk has enough feats to spare), circlet of persuasion +3 (also helps with diplomacy skill), CHR let's assume no modifier. A whopping total of +15. Lets him pass the UMD check in 50% of all times.
Since he can retry as often as he likes, he can safely cast it ahead of combat (it lasts almost 2 hours). And even in combat, it's feasible (in particular if he has a luck blade with a re-roll).
The party pc casters will likely gladly provide AMF scrolls to the monk at half cost (or shared party cost since it benefits all) who can make so nice use of them.



Spellcasters can combat other spellcasters. An eleventh-level spellcaster can cast Antimagic Field--

Never said anything else. Only that the monk can do the AMF tactics better in many more situations. The spellcaster casting AMF himself is toast, except in VERY rare circumstances (like a cleric going vs a wizard alone, for instance).


or he could cast Greater Dispel Magic, dispel the enemy's flight, and allow the party's druid to Pounce upon the fellow.

Good ideas. But what is the difference to a monk stunning the enemy caster and letting the party's druid pounce the fellow? (better yet, let the rogue do it...read Funkyodor's post above just before yours. It cannot be written better).


Alternatively, he could utilize Baleful Polymorph and force a Fortitude save.

This is a typical example of the many "caster-win-button-beliefs" out there, the enemy caster-turned-squirrel is allowed a second, WILL save, and may retain his spellpowers if he saves. Likewise, he still has all the spells up that failed to be dispelled before (it only has 50% chance vs same level opponents. The monk with his attack may have a better chance even. Definitely higher with AMF up).
AMF will even mean the fly spell of the enemy caster goes down once the monk even gets within 10ft of him with his jump check of +50 at higher levels. Enough in most dungeon-like confined spaces.


A spellcaster can see invisible spellcasters (and reveal them with Glitterdust), he can target the other spellcaster without having to achieve melee proximity, and he can protect himself against incoming spells as well as emply (Greater) Dispel Magic. In other words, a spellcaster has all of the tools that would allow him to combat other spellcasters. A spellcaster facing a spellcaster of equal level has a one in two chance of losing, all else being equal--that is as it should be. A spellcaster in a party will allow his party to prevail. A monk... well, frankly, I am unsure as to what exactly you think a monk will do. Win initiative, charge (via a flying item), and then attempt to apply a Stunning Fist?

Yes, with AMF that is enough. At low levels, likewise that is enough (when the caster's defenses are much poorer against charging non-casters).
Everyone has ways to combat enemy casters.
1) Casters have their spells. Problem: spells of the enemy offer many ways to protect against them
2) Most non-casters have range weapons. Problem: Wind wall, concealment
3) The monk has movement and many spell immunities. Problem: flying enemies outside his jump reach (although the monk may pick up martial weapon proficiency or be an elf for the great composite longbow)
Overall, I guess the monk is best at fighting spellcasters because he is so difficult to be stopped and most spellcasters do not have that many physcial defenses against him (a druid in wildshape is a different matter; so the monk should leave him to the archer-fighter or own party spellcasters).

Ah, and note: not all spellcasters have see invisiblity on their spell list. Druids may shape into a scent-able animal; but the easiest way is with some relatively cheap items or a griffon companion (scent).



From what I have seen of your posts, you seem to take nearly negligible weaknesses of strong classes and do your best to blow them out of proportion, and take nearly negligible strengths of weak classes and attempt to do the same. This may or may not be commendable, but it is hardly looking at the situation realistically.

From what I have seen of your posts, you commit the same mistake as many of the "casters-are-overpowerd-withautowinbuttons" fraction on these boards. A lot of the great skills, class abilities of non-casters tend to get neglected because...well, spells tend to be flashier, catch more attention, and many, many DMs (me included) have for a long, long time ignored and neglected caster and magic drawbacks simply because it is quite complicated to find the stuff in the rules. But they are there (at least in core).
Great examples of some non-magic stuff that made it into board consciousness of being broken (but then readily forgotten when it comes to asses what to do vs casters):
- sleight of hand. Maxed by a rogue, it means free actions to rob a wizard blind of ALL his components and not-in-hands-carried items.
- diplomacy. Maxed by bard, rogue or monk it means encounter ended without any save.
- UMD. Even cross-class all it means spells up to 9th level usable by all (if you have the requisite attribute, but even that can be emulated with UMD).
- tanglefoot bags and smokesticks: virtually unsurmountable by casters at low level (and it's non-magical equipment).


There are surprisingly few--it requires a highly specialized character or a series of specific items, as well as good luck and generally initiative. In real games it is not impossible, but there is a reason that in one of my games, the monk has come close to death repeatedly, whereas the (competent, but not hyper-optimized) wizard has not had hit point damage dealt to him in the last four sessions. Our enemies have included archers, fighters, monks, an assortment of melee monsters, spellcasters, and more.

Well, likely with our respective game experience we can prove nothing (in one of my games the party monk almost never gets hit by spells or damage- even if his AC is not the best, it is extremely difficult to do full attack against him. He uses spring attack often. Combine with disarms/trips to serve opponents on the silver platter for the other meleers. The monk is the best defensive class, barring perhabs lvl 17&up casters).
My strong suspicion is that your wizard is not challenged enough by your GM, otherwise he would not have remained without damage in four(!) consecutive sessions whic happeared to have been combat-heavy.
Let me guess: your wizard never had any problems with losing his spellbook (likely no enemy ever had that idea to steal/destroy/sunder it, did they?), nor never any problems with recovering his spells over night.


Long-lasting spells such as Overland Flight and teleporting away from danger are common defensive-spellcaster tactics. They are not a significant resource drain.

Likewise are the uses of abundant step and superior movement by the monk to get out of encounters (which he will spot and listen before casters even, so he is surprised much less frequently, while in contrast to the druid being able to move silently and hide vs opponent spot and listen). Your point being?


Druids can fly, as a matter of fact--but having easy access to Fly and Overland Flight is vastly superior to having Boots of Flying thrice a day or shelling out the money for a Cloak of Wings (after your Ring of Freedom of Movement, presumably... my, that's a hundred thousand already).

Ring of Movement cost 40.000. Boots of Flying are 16,000 (actually, boots of speed are better for a monk and cheaper. Ranged weapons can do the trick vs flying casters). Where are the extra 44,000 coming from?


I am unsure as to how leaping and attacking works, but Stunning Fist is entirely negated by critical immunity. If the monk has a Ring of Freedom of Movement, and attribute increasers, the spellcaster has a Mage's Body Ward, a +1 Mithral buckler of Heavy Fortification. That, or he may well make the saving throw.

Mage's Body Ward I do not now (likely non-core, which is difficult to use for comparisons, since so much is possible there).
The mithral buckler is a good defense. However, in the mid-levels where it could come up
- likely the spellcaster has not always protection vs grapple up
- the buckler can be sundered by the monk (does not even incur AoO, since the wizard likely has no unarmed strike) with some attacks and use stun with the last of his flurries.
- at higher levels, the AMF will render the fortification enchantment useless.

The save will be difficult for the wizard (in particular in an AMF), in particular since the monk likely maxes his WIS and at high levels could get age boni without physical drawbacks.



Even if he does not--the caster is stunned... in midair. The monk falls. The next round the monk may miss, or the save may be made, and the monk does little damage per hit.

With AMF, the caster falls with him. Only: the monk has slow fall and tumbling which both work nicely in AMF.
At low levels, the stunned caster is easy prey for the ranged attacks of the others in the party (including 30ft range sneaks).



Which is what, exactly? Monks requiring less equipment is a myth. Instead of a weapon, they have to pay for a more-expensive amulet of mighty fists; they require more attribute boosters; they require items to boost their Armor Class that are more expensive than armor doing the same; they require Freedom of Movement and Flight the same as everyone else does... at what level, precisely, does the monk have Freedom of Movement, Flight, all of his attribute boosters, and so on? What did he do before then? What do other classes have?


Sigh. Monks require less equipment than most other classes except the druid. However, unlike the druid (in his animal form), he can make use of the great many items out there so he can use the cash he saved for a greater choice of items (found, exchanged with fellow pcs or bought, depending on campaign style).



The monk requires an Amulet of Natural Attacks,

Nope. A ki weapon is just fine (say, a staff+1 of ki, which is also great for disarms). The Amulet spot goes to the WIS booster.


he requires armor class boosteres (Bracers of Armor are traditional),

Nope. The WIS bonus to AC, plus mage armour effects (potions, pc casters putting it on him) put them ahead of full plate fighters easily at low levels, not even magical items needed (plus, they get no movement skill penalities, no danger from STR loss when armour gets heavy, no movement penalties and it also applies to touch AC).


he requires more attribute boosters...

Nope. Just like all classes, he benefits from it. He makes best use out of WIS first, then DEX. But this he shares with the spellcasting classes (replace WIS with their relevant spellcasting stat).


now he is also spending a feat on Blind-Fight and purchasing a Horn of Fog, spending his actions blowing his own horn (so, a-heh, to speak)? I can not particularily picture the monk you are describing as being effective in any given situation.

Why, I wonder? Even the (rather crappy) horn of fog (better get potion of obscuring mist) combined with the blind-fight feat is quite powerful at low levels: no targeting of spells possible any more, at least 50% less damage from missile attacks, great way to divert/escape, and way superiority in melee. And all without expanding a limited resource for a day (like spells). And actionS? Activating the horn is ONE standard action, only continuing to blow it takes longer (which makes it crappy, so, as I said, get a potion of obscuring mist).
I am starting to get the feeling that you have not checked the (core) rules enough for all the nice tactical possiblities out there and simplify too much by some of the awesome caster spells (which may not all be common among npcs).

"Also spending a feat" sounds like you mean it is a waste:
A human monk of, say, 6th level has
Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Improved Disarm, Combat Reflexes AND 4 more feats that nicely fit on
Blind-fight, improved initiative, weapon finesse, plus 1 more (maybe alertness? maybe exptertise? Maybe a skill focus- escape artist or already UMD, or better even magical apitude, depends). Later, maybe the spring attack chain. Where is the problem of feat scarcity?



The monk excels at surviving, providing he avoids melee, yes.

Er...I try it once more: the monk for melee has
- the best saves, plus later the best spell resistance (better than the cleric spell since it is up 24/7)
- the best touch AC (in many cases, best overall AC)
- the highest movement
- thus the best jump (non-dispellable means to overcome walls, obstacles etc.)
- the best combination of spot/listen and movesilently/hide with the rogue (and exceeding him due to likely higher WIS in spot/listen)

Where exactly is he unable to survive combat?



That is not a party role. He is more difficult to disable than other classes (again, with the above qualifier)... but he contributes next to nothing.

Contradiction? He is weak in combat, but difficult to disable? Sounds a bit odd to me.
He DOES contribute.
THE TYPICAL PARTY ROLES
- to fighters: by enaging enemies in melee who cannot avoid him and thus allow archery attacks. By providing melee assistance (while less subject to enemy spells, could even abundent-step a knocked out fighter/barbarian out of melee
- to rogues: stun. flank. move. nuff'said
- to clerics: get/carry fast fallen/afflicted comrades to them for healing/helping. Relieving cleric of helping him since he is immune to most stuff and has high save/resistance for the rest
- to wizards: someone taking out/occupying the enemy npc spellcaster? Oh yes, please!
THE TYPICAL PARTY CHALLENGES
- combat: see above
- scout: move, spot, listen, movesilently/hide. Again, nuff said
- social: diplomacy, aid another function for bard or rogue party face (since monk's CHR likely is lower) or serve as a backup
- research: again, aid another with knowledge-religion or knowledge-arcane to party caster or serve as backup (sometines even the casters fail in their knowledge skill rolls). Assist with scouting missions.

So please stop this "monk contributes next to nothing" nonsense.


What if the wizard poses as a fighter in plate mail while traveling? If the monk poses as a fighter, he will not clank as an armored fighter will, so it ought to be trivial to notice something being amiss--but if he is believed to be a fighter, he will simply be dismissed.

Er...what exactly makes the wizard in plate mail more believable as afighter than the monk?
Plus: it is even better for a monk to pose as a wizard (since that is without armour).


A high-Wisdom, high-Dexerity monk seems like a good idea but will be utterly incapable of melee combat. A good Fortitude save with a mediocre Constitution score will still mean failing those saves regularly, by the way.

Weapon finesse, stunning fist, spring attack (great with the high move). And since when do you fail regularly on your high base save? Even if a monk focuses on WIS and DEX, this does not mean he has an 8 in all other stats. With a CON 14, Cloak of Resistance +1 that is already a +8 on Fort saves at 6th level (and he is immune to disease effects). A barbarian or even fighter may have a bit higher Fort saves, but that hardly constitutes "regularly failing " saves (or all pcs would).



Inside an antimagic field the monk can not fly, so his movement speed is irrelevant (and a charge should close the distance whether one is a monk or not).


SImilarly, inside an AMF a caster cannot fly :smallbiggrin:
His movement speed is not irrelevant, since he can jump up. In the rare cases that the enemy spell caster is too far above him, the other party members jump in and bring down the caster (say, by dispels), so that the AMF monk can finish him.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 07:40 AM
Ah, and to finish off nicely.


Yay, I'm a monk in an AMF! I can own those casters...

Yes, you are right!



Wait... why is the wizard up 40 ft in the air...

I'm the monk, I can make a DC 120 jump check! Then the wizard falls!

1) Ah...you see, the game is meant as a group game. Party caster pls dispel? Thanks.
2) Er...with AMF you only need to get up 30ft (60 jump DC, possible at high levels even without magic) to reach the wizard 40ft in the air (who also needs some time to get up to that height if we are talking about the beginning of combat).
3) How many situations do you have where the caster can be more than 40ft up in the air in a dungeon?


Wheeeeewwwwww*splat*.

No splat from 40ft. Tumble and Slow Fall are your friend (even in AMF).



Damn, let's try that again!

Wheeeeeewwwwww*splat*.

See 1)-3) above.

Ah, and by the 2nd round, the party wizard and party divine caster have launched 4 dispels vs the enemy caster. Do you have the same hunch as I do that the AMF comes in handy now?



Nyah nyah, you cant touch... me.

Indeed the monk's touch AC is the highest in the game, congratulations! (EDIT: if I understand your irony correctly - high AC never directly helps anyone else, only indirectly by making you stay longer around to help others)



*Wizard sticks monk in a box of stone*

Now, let's see how long your AMF lasts...

Haha! Foolish wizard, I can use... abundant step... which is Su...

Hmmm...let me see. You can lower your AMF with a standard action, no problem (which the wizard cannot notice in the box of stone). Then abundante step away.
Or better, ki strike your way out of the stupid box of stone (likely a wall of stone effect). By that high level, reduce your weapon-finessed BAB for Power attack damage and out you go, with AMF still up. Oopsey...the caster better be gone or he is a dead caster.
He MAY have called help with a gate in the meantime. But then he still does not defeat the monk necessarily, plus he henceforth incurs the wrath of the entitiy he called against its will (quite likely).

- Giacomo

EDIT: and what are the other party members doing while the enemy spellcaster seals off the monk?

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 07:53 AM
(....on UMD) A whopping total of +15. Lets him pass the UMD check in 50% of all times.


yuck! Got the % wrong. Only 30% of all times. Still, enough ahead of combat. Potential to raise UMD even more is:
- get another +2 synergy from decipher script
- get some luck effect (luck stone)
- get some morale effect (good hope, heroism)

- Giacomo

@Arbitrarity: to keep in your light-mooded style (I actually greatly enjoyed the description!), you could also get a halfling monk who is then hurled by a STR-maxed out barbarian with the throw anything feat to hurl at the enemy caster...:smallbiggrin: Do not know the range, though. I guess it is 10ft increment as per improvised missiles...

Orzel
2007-05-24, 08:10 AM
There really only 3 real ways to combat a powerful spellcaster.

1) High Damage Ranged weapons.

Enough dice on some arrows/bolts/axes/daggers/bullets on a full attack before Wind Wall can scare a caster. Then run through the wall and do it again for the kill.

2) High Damage Damage + Stealth
If the caster can't see you, he can cast spells on you nor will he cast the proper defensive spells. Hoping out a bush and stabbing 50-75% of a wizard's HP is a nice eye opener. The caster usually only has 1 or 2 rounds left to escape/kill you or they'll die. Combine it with 1 to be extra mean

3) Magic
We all know the deal. Dispell and cast.

Monks can't do any of the 3. Monk's melee and ranged damage both suck. Monks can't cast spells.

Rangers make better mage killers. They can use stealth, have great melee damage, have good ranged damage, some buffs, a flanker chump, and all the animals your wild empathy rolls give you.

Illiterate Scribe
2007-05-24, 08:26 AM
By the way, Giacomo, you've already maxed out 5 skills (escape artist, use magic device, spellcraft, spot, listen) plus spent serious points in Know:Religion, Know:Arcana, and Diplomacy, from your 4 (+ or probably - INT) points/level Just a heads-up :thog: .

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 08:26 AM
4) monk gets to spell caster (with AMF even shutting down a contingency, with better chances then the rest due to best spell defenses and highest movement).
Grapple (even without improved grapple he can beat an arcane caster here), stunning fist, maybe quivering palm in the same strike at high levels (so two high fort DCs instead of one).

Monk can do this one. Noone else can (maybe the fighter with stunning fist and AMF trick up, but has less move and noe quivering palm).

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 08:30 AM
By the way, Giacomo, you've already maxed out 5 skills (escape artist, use magic device, spellcraft, spot, listen) plus spent serious points in Know:Religion, Know:Arcana, and Diplomacy, from your 4 (+ or probably - INT) points/level Just a heads-up :thog: .

Good points. A human monk (say, with INT 10) has only 5 points/level. So obviously not everything can be maxed out.

Escape Artist: thanks to the salve (and later freedom of movement), actually hardly a skill point is needed here
Spot, listen: should be maxed. With WIS, this greatly helps the party (could also be lower if there is someone else with the points to spare in the party, maybe a druid).
UMD: should be likewise maxed. But maybe only at higher levels for the AMF tactics.
Spellcraft: get up only to 5 ranks for the UMD synergy. At low levels, with someone in the group with it, it is not necessary.

Basically, max 3 skills that the party needs, use the rest for other stuff, I'd say. If a scout is needed, raise ms/hide, if a party face is needed (not that good with low CHR, better job for rogue, cleric or bard), max diplomacy. Etc. 1 rank in knowledge skills each is enough to get a DC 10 chance to provide a +2 bonus.

- Giacomo

Orzel
2007-05-24, 08:37 AM
4) monk gets to spell caster (with AMF even shutting down a contingency, without with better chances then the rest due to best spell defenses and highest movement).
Grapple (even without improved grapple he can beat an arcane caster here), stunning fist, maybe quivering palm in the same strike at high levels (so two high fort DCs instead of one).

Monk can do this one. Noone else can (maybe the fighter with stunning fist and AMF trick up, but has less move and noe quivering palm).

- Giacomo

Such a monk sucks at everything else since he probably has almost no more skill points left. See Topic Title.

Monks can't contribute a lot to a party without MinMax. Once you max out a cross class skill, you're not making the class look that strong.

13_CBS
2007-05-24, 09:42 AM
Giacomo, I think one of the main arguements is that monks, while capable of defeating casters if played correctly, must go through strenuous effort and resources to do so.

I've never played DnD before, so I probably should be staying out of this debate, but from what I can tell an unadorned caster (save for, I suppose, his spellbook) can easily whip out a few spells to be a severe inconvenience for the monk. The monk, on the other hand, must specialize, spend thousands of gold on items, do this, do that, etc.

This seems to apply for almost all non-casters attempting to defeat wizards/sorcerers. Many people are miffed that non casters have to go through comparatively much more effort to defeat casters than vice versa.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 10:13 AM
Hi, 13_CBS,

you are correct that many on these (and other boards) see casters as widely ahead of non-casters. My opinion (and that of a minority on these boards) is that this is not so and that in the basic rules (core) game, the classes are quite evenly balanced.

The imo above misperception of the majority stem, in my view, from three sources
- more rules knowledge for spellcasting classes than for stuff you can do outside of magic because, let's face it, DD3.5 is a high-magic-content fantasy game by default (can be modified, but the average is like that). So al lot of players love the spellcasting classes (me included) because it's fun to do magic, even if in a game.
- for some who are around quite a long time for D&D the experience of the older editions (where magic was immensely powerful and non-casters were able to do much less) still lingers
- most importantly, Dungeon Masters (the referees of the game, so to speak) go too soft on players of spellcasters, ignoring the disadvantages in the rules to balance the great stuff you can do with magic because 1) it is often a DoEverything or DoNothing thing, which could greatly impede game fun for everyone* and 2) it is quite complicated to foresee the possibilities of the lawoftheuniverse-breaking stuff that magic does as a DM. It takes a lot of effort and experience (but it is rewarding since it balances the game for everyone and provides more interesting challenges). Plus, it is tough to play a caster intelligently; even tougher if as a DM you have to play a non-player-character spellcaster AND everything else that happens in the world.

- Giacomo

*as an example, let us compare a monk and a wizard player. A monk may be weaker in offensive and general possibilities to affect the game than the wizard. But he is much better defensively.
So both in the party attack mighty npc opponents. The monk may miss with his fist attack, but has higher hit points (life energy), better resistance to spells and better armour class (probabiltiy to be hit). So he is still around in combat after the opponent's turn.
However, the wizard player does a spell that the opponent saves against. now the weak wizard is open for attack vs the opponent. What do you do as a DM? Correct. In most cases, the DM will not declare "the opponent walks over to your weak wizard and smashes him into dust."
By the rules, it should happen more often to the wizard at low levels than to any other class, in particular the monk. This balances out the great spell power they receive at higher levels.
Some have critisised this bias in the rules, but I believe that a DM can manage to provide balanced challenges for everyone. But it should not mean that casters are proof from all ill affects that affect their spellcasting (and believe me, there are many, many such effects in the rules).

EDIT: about the more resource thing: that is not quite correct. Non-casters and casters receive about the same magical equipment (the caster classes can with some special ability create items of their own at half cost, though), but the non-casters imo make disproportionately higher use of the magic items since it allows them to emulate some of the best stuff that casters can do. Conversely, some of the spells that casters get allow them to do stuff that non-casters can do. Overall, it balances out.
Items often do not get used up through their use, and non-casters do not spend most of their abilities/ressources as casters do (since they can only do their spells a limited number of times per day)

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 10:24 AM
Such a monk sucks at everything else since he probably has almost no more skill points left. See Topic Title.

A monk has more skill points than all casters except the druid, and more than the fighter. That puts him into class mid-field, I daresay (plus, his skills are quite good).
The OP in his topic title asked "So why is the monk weak?" and I tried to show that in fact, he is not weak because to assign the quality "weak" you must not only consider the class'es weakness (and some of those posted by you and others even are no weaknesses).


Monks can't contribute a lot to a party without MinMax. Once you max out a cross class skill, you're not making the class look that strong.

They can contribute even without minmax. Actually monks need less minmax than casters, because they only need to select from feats and skills, while casters need to select from feats, skills AND from a myriad of spells.
Cross-class max out is very useful for all classes for spellcraft, UMD, spot and/or listen and maybe move silently/hide to give the whole party a chance at sneaking past that guard.

- Giacomo

Indon
2007-05-24, 10:28 AM
It's been brought up that even unoptimized in the least, a monk is solid stealth support, which I agree with. They're great to work with a scout, ranger, or rogue, but the thing is, not many games are based on special-ops infiltration sort of stuff. But the monk can definitely do that.

So monks work well with and in support of stealthers, and fight about as well as a rogue (worse vs. some targets, better vs. others) while being much less vulnerable.

They also have some of the best maneuverability of the core classes (barring an optimized wizard, of course, who is best at everything, etc); a monk is not only fast on foot, fast sneaking, and fast tumbling, but a monk with a fly, swim, or climb speed from, say a magical buff, or a racial ability, is suddenly the fastest flier, swimmer, or climber in the party as well (as monk speed bonuses apply to alternate modes of movement). Another reason why Polymorph rocks so utterly hard for monks.

...really, all you'd need to make monks very powerful, IMO, is Wild Shape.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 10:30 AM
100% in agreement to Indon. I am not sure about the polymorph rules ,though- doesn't the monk lose his extraordinary abilities (movement is one of those) when shaping into another creature, even with alter self?

- Giacomo

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-05-24, 10:36 AM
A monk has more skill points than all casters except the druid, and more than the fighter. That puts him into class mid-field, I daresay (plus, his skills are quite good).
Base skill points maybe.

But Intelligence and Charisma are the only two stats that the monk doesn't need for the role its supposed to fill. That means my 18 Int human wizard is getting 7 skill points per level while your 10 Int human monk is only getting 5.

In any case, I believe that comment was referencing a build where 4 skills were already maxed (two of them cross class, no less!), and there were still other skills left on the dock.

Indon
2007-05-24, 10:37 AM
100% in agreement to Indon. I am not sure about the polymorph rules ,though- doesn't the monk lose his extraordinary abilities (movement is one of those) when shaping into another creature, even with alter self?

- Giacomo

Pretty sure he doesn't lose his exceptional abilities. A polymorphed monk might lose some Perfect Self bonuses (being qualities, and such), but I'm pretty sure exceptional abilities aren't lost.

So, for instance, a polymorphed monk deals unarmed damage as if it were a monk of that size. An easy way to turn, say, a 1d8 into a 3d8 attack even at mid levels.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 10:48 AM
Base skill points maybe.

But Intelligence and Charisma are the only two stats that the monk doesn't need for the role its supposed to fill. That means my 18 Int human wizard is getting 7 skill points per level while your 10 Int human monk is only getting 5.

You are likely correct. The monk may get INT 14 with little effort from beginning to be on par with the wizard (better, in fact, because the wizard got his INT 18 likely later or he used up 16 points of his point buy in the beginning). But since he can get improved disarm or improved trip without expertise and the INT 13 requisite, it is likely better to shape a 28-point-buy like this:
STR 14, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 12, WIS 14, CHR 8. OK, that would take him one point behind the wizard.:smallbiggrin:
For a weapon finesse/stunning fist-like build, possibly you could lower the STR to 10, raise INT or DEX/WIS more. Or have STR, INT at 10 each and start out with DEX, WIS at 16 each. Depends on the style.


In any case, I believe that comment was referencing a build where 4 skills were already maxed (two of them cross class, no less!), and there were still other skills left on the dock.

Yep, that's why I corrected it above.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 10:53 AM
Pretty sure he doesn't lose his exceptional abilities. A polymorphed monk might lose some Perfect Self bonuses (being qualities, and such), but I'm pretty sure exceptional abilities aren't lost.

Yep! Checked the rules on alter self (on which polymorph etc. is based) and it says you only use your racial estraordinary abilities. So movement at monk level. Awesome...


So, for instance, a polymorphed monk deals unarmed damage as if it were a monk of that size. An easy way to turn, say, a 1d8 into a 3d8 attack even at mid levels.

Even more awesome, since it is common practice for spellcasters to enlarge and polymorph other etc their non-casting combatants.
For even more fun, a monk could dump his STR to around 10, get a ring of spell storing and use clerical divine power or rightous might (he could UMD it alternatively). Anyone still arguing for "monk is a weak class"?:smallbiggrin:

- Giacomo

EDIT: as for cross-class skill problems like UMD, maybe a level dip in rogue helps - also gets sneak attack for own use after stuns...

the_tick_rules
2007-05-24, 11:00 AM
the monk makes a good grappler. the monks advantage is that you inflict unarmed damage when you grapple and anyone but a monk doesn't do very much unarmed damage. actually that's was my monk's best team manuver do a charging grapple, then pin em while the party mobs the target. but i had earth's embrace, so my pin's did an extra d12.

Orzel
2007-05-24, 11:14 AM
The issue with the monk is that the common builds for the class don't bring much to a decent sized party. The monk class has too few SP to be a true skill user, lags behind in normal combat, and lacks magic. Choosing a monk over a rogue, ranger, bard, scout, begu... is a hard one. Cross class, magic rings, begging for buffs, and similiar things are available to all classes. Monks can sneak, detect, talk, and hop around but many classes can do that.

Monks just punch better in a grapple, move faster, and die last. These things are not often as useful as the unique strengths of other classes.

Telonius
2007-05-24, 11:21 AM
Monks are not meant to be damage-dealers. In my experience, they work much, much better at battlefield controllers and tacticians. I've personally played a VoP monk from level 1 to 18, in the Shackled City module. Our Ranged Fighter outdid him for damage, our Rogue outdid him for sneaky, and our Cleric outdid him for AC. I took Intuitive Strike to avoid needing Strength, then pumped up Wis for AC and to-hit. This still left me below fighter-ish levels of disarming, but gave me a decent shot of actually disarming the critter in question. Even if I failed, I could usually get it in a full-attack flurry next round.

I did take Improved Grapple instead of Stunning Fist (the most spectacularly useless ability I've seen in any campaign - in five years of playing D&D I have never once seen it successfully employed), as well as Improved Disarm. My main tactic was to win initiative, then rush in and disarm whatever the most dangerous enemy appeared to be (using a 2h Quarterstaff if necessary); or, grapple Pointy Hat if he's accessible. This tactic was pretty brutally effective. I should note that we were fighting a lot of humanoid opponents inside low-ceilinged dungeons. A monster-heavy environment or a flying opponent would have caused a lot more problems for me.

The Valiant Turtle
2007-05-24, 11:22 AM
Allow me to point out one under-utilized anti-caster tactic. If you do get into melee range, don't attack them. Wait until their turn, then attack them. It's even more fun if you can grapple or trip them in mid-cast.

Disrupting casting with damage can be very effective. It works well for manyshot archers with elemental bows + elemental arrows (3d6 + mods per arrow). Low-Mid level casters can't afford many quickened spells, if any to help them counter this. If you play it right, you can at least force a caster to play defense, and use up precious high level spell slots.

Frankly, at Low-Med levels casters should normally have very high initiative unless they are allowed to use that horribly broken "I win initiative" spell from the Spell Companion. It's not hard to use initiative against them.

And don't forget, god help the caster if you are his fourth encounter that day.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-05-24, 11:26 AM
But since he can get improved disarm or improved trip without expertise and the INT 13 requisite, it is likely better to shape a 28-point-buy like this:
STR 14, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 12, WIS 14, CHR 8. OK, that would take him one point behind the wizard.:smallbiggrin:
'Cept a monk is often better served by shaving shaving that Int down to 10 and boosting his or her Wisdom or Strength. Even if the monk can only raise that stat to 15, retaining the +2 modifier, it will be boosted to 16 and a +3 modifier at 4th level.

Mechanically, anyways.

Indon
2007-05-24, 11:27 AM
Even more awesome, since it is common practice for spellcasters to enlarge and polymorph other etc their non-casting combatants.
For even more fun, a monk could dump his STR to around 10, get a ring of spell storing and use clerical divine power or rightous might (he could UMD it alternatively). Anyone still arguing for "monk is a weak class"?:smallbiggrin:


Well, realizing and exploiting the raw, unbridled synergy of the polymorphed monk requires a degree of tactical optimization. I think few would disagree that the monk has plenty of potential for optimization. The thing is, without said optimization (or with very little of it), monks are kind of meh compared to other classes at similarly low levels of optimization.

selfcritical
2007-05-24, 11:31 AM
I think it's best to leave the BAB alone, but allow the Monk to make a full attack as a standard action while using Monk weapons or unarmed attacks (note: natural attacks such as claw attacks shouldn't qualify). That would allow them to be a very effective skirmisher. Add in something like Air Walk at higher levels, and they could also take on fliers.

I would also think about letting them do their "unarmed" damage with any monk weapon, effectively replacing that weapons base damage die. The extra damage dice are supposed to represent superior technique, so I don't see any reason why they can't learn special striking/breathing/meditation whatever techniques that make your kama or staff strikes deadlier.

Mr. Moogle
2007-05-24, 11:38 AM
I personally enjoy using a monk. Even though they dont do that much damage. In an urban campaign their abilitys are quite fun (slow fall improved evasion and immunity to poison). But another way to make them truly shine is Permanency Greater Magic Fang +5, it is a must for monks that happen to have 15000 or so on their hands at any given time.

Green Bean
2007-05-24, 11:43 AM
I personally enjoy using a monk. Even though they dont do that much damage. In an urban campaign their abilitys are quite fun (slow fall improved evasion and immunity to poison). But another way to make them truly shine is Permanency Greater Magic Fang +5, it is a must for monks that happen to have 15000 or so on their hands at any given time.

Until someone hits them with Dispel Magic. Then, your entire purchase goes down the drain.

Kelyss
2007-05-24, 11:45 AM
I hear lots of people talking about how the monk is the weakest of the core classes, and seen a few brief reasons (low BAB, etc).

But prior to coming here, I had always thought that it's special abilities (ki strike, etc) somewhat balanced it out. Oh, and my DM insists it's brokenly powerful, and that just seems wrong to me.

So a slightly more detailed description of it's weaknesses would do much to appease my curiosity.Monks are weak at low levels, but at higher levels the are hard to stop. you cant wear armor but you add your wisdom bonus.

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-24, 12:12 PM
Monks are weak at low levels, but at higher levels the are hard to stop. you cant wear armor but you add your wisdom bonus.Hard to stop by what, a commoner? Seriously, this has been addressed.

Orzel
2007-05-24, 12:17 PM
The funny thing is monks are great in video games.

Because spells are missing/nerfed in many games, magic items are everywhere, and feat options are low; monks swinging for Nat 20d is not so bad *cough*NWN*sneeze*. Allergies.

elliott20
2007-05-24, 12:22 PM
I personally dislike the monk class on the grounds that I feel it's just not a very good concept. It's painfully obvious that whoever first designed the monk class was trying to come up with some way of encapulating all of his favorite martial art flick concepts and mish-mash it into a single package. The end result? every single monk is multi-attack, high jumping, meditative and have incredible control over their bowel movements. Basically, a fist of the northstar variant + bruce lee + "mysterious east" orientalism + ninjas.

And it does NONE of those well.

It's not a class that was actually thought through. It's the result of trying to cram every little cool thing they liked about martial artists movies into one package. Chances are, they realized that they added too much and started ducking things to make them fall in line but then kept little bits of every part.

So you end up with someone who can do a lot of things poorly, but nothing well.

Personally if you ask me, I think monk's if anything should be MORE flexible to reflect the vast differences between them.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 12:32 PM
Hard to stop by what, a commoner? Seriously, this has been addressed.

Show me a commoner with three high saves, highest grapple damage, spell resistance, highest move in the game, highest touch AC and we may continue down this route.
Seriously, this has been addressed.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Quirinus_Obsidian
2007-05-24, 12:36 PM
:smallsmile: The second best character I ever played was a monk/initiate of pistis sophia. Did not need high STR, has weapon finesse with unarmed strike. Has Vow of Poverty. Improved natural attack, improved disarm, stunning fist and freezing the lifeblood. Did not take flurry of blows; went with the decisive strike route from the PHBII. He was hiarious! :smallsmile:

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-24, 12:57 PM
Show me a commoner with three high saves, highest grapple damage, spell resistance, highest move in the game, highest touch AC and we may continue down this route.
Seriously, this has been addressed.:smallsmile:

- GiacomoAll you did there is prove that a monk is harder to take down than a commoner is. That's obvious.

The assertion was that a high-level monk is "hard to stop." When in fact, most high level monsters will be quite capable of this. They have more strength, good AC, and usually lots of hit points.

I also want to take this away from the direction of "OMG a wizard can beat a monk!" vs "No way, the monk will totally stop any caster class." D&D isn't primarily about PvP. What we need to be looking at is how a high-level monk handles...a high level monster. A Balor is the classic example, or alternately a CR 20 dragon of some sort.

The wizard has lots of ways to deal with these threats. I'll let Tippy or someone deal with that if you don't think they do.

A fighter has a lot less he can do, but with a certain kind of build he can at least damage the thing.

Meanwhile the monk does what? Grapples the dragon? Runs up and flurry-of-blows on the Balor? He's easy to stop because he can't actually do much to them in the first place.

Roderick_BR
2007-05-24, 01:15 PM
(...)
I did take Improved Grapple instead of Stunning Fist (the most spectacularly useless ability I've seen in any campaign - in five years of playing D&D I have never once seen it successfully employed),(...)
Stunning Fist was brutally effective in NeverWinter Nights. This guy beat my raging barbarian that had a full plate of speed and a +5 keen scythe (the scenario gave lots of itens) in a few rounds by continually pummeling me with stunning fist (that I managed to fail my Fort in EVERY attack, despite my high Con and several magic itens), and keeping me unable to even act.
And no, Heavy Fortification itens were not available in that server.
But I agree, grappling can be very effective against single opponents.

Ramza00
2007-05-24, 01:29 PM
I ain't going to read the entire thread.

That said a monk is weak by itself. Giving two things 1) Great Stats, or 2) Spells from himself and multiclassing/spells cast on him/spells cast in a ring of spell storing. A monk can be quite good.

Imagine a Sorcerer/Enlightened Fist/Abjurant Champion build with Overland Flight, Greater Mighty Wallop (can get up to 12d8 damage for your fists), Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Mage Armor, Blood Wind (Make those fists ranged weapons for 1 round), Wraithstrike (touch attacks yeah), Heroics (A bonus feat), False Life (more hp)

Taking the pre-requsisite feats, practiced spellcaster, superior unarmed strike , monk belt, and the twf chain.

This build can be a highly effective melee build, (a real sorcerer is still more powerful due to how D&D does class balance unfortunately), it fills the monk flavor, and it is a kung fu monk.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-24, 02:00 PM
All you did there is prove that a monk is harder to take down than a commoner is. That's obvious.

OK, sorry. I got carried down with the notion that a monk can even be compared with a commoner in any aspect.


The assertion was that a high-level monk is "hard to stop." When in fact, most high level monsters will be quite capable of this. They have more strength, good AC, and usually lots of hit points.

In these aspects they beat most of the pc classes. At high level play, much more is needed and the monk provides some excellent niches.


I also want to take this away from the direction of "OMG a wizard can beat a monk!" vs "No way, the monk will totally stop any caster class." D&D isn't primarily about PvP. What we need to be looking at is how a high-level monk handles...a high level monster. A Balor is the classic example, or alternately a CR 20 dragon of some sort.

Actually, in PvP the monk is naturally strong vs casters since it is his specialty to take down individual BBEGs, hamper them, or obstruct their spellcasting.
But a Balor challenge? You asked the right player...:smallbiggrin:


The wizard has lots of ways to deal with these threats. I'll let Tippy or someone deal with that if you don't think they do.
A fighter has a lot less he can do, but with a certain kind of build he can at least damage the thing.
Meanwhile the monk does what? Grapples the dragon? Runs up and flurry-of-blows on the Balor? He's easy to stop because he can't actually do much to them in the first place.

All right, let us see...
First of all, as outlined by me in an earlier post up here the monk, while being strong indvidually, he can greatly help other party members as well.
But what if it would hinge on him to take out a balor (core)?

Against such a monster, AMF tactics are likely not a good idea, since the balor, like a dragon, are among the creatures powerful at magic AND being a better grappler (or the monk maxes out escape artist, at lvl 20 he should have something like a +35 modifier DEX +9, with skill focus, so roughly 50% to get out of a balor's grapple, but the best is then an impasse, the worst remaining grappled and taking damage.)
So it should be the stunning fist/quivering palm in one strike route.

A good thing is that the monk can easily get to within 240ft (outside true seeing, so a simple potion of invisiblity plus maxed move silently does the trick) and still is able to charge thanks to 90ft base speed and haste (say, boots of speed). So the monk gets the surprise round. If the encounter is already underway, sneak/move away (he's faster than the balor and could use non-counterable abundant step if threatened by the balor's greater dispel magic) and retry.
He charges, strikes with holy, ki, staff +5 (+8 weapon total). This, with BAB of +15, +9 DEX, +1 haste, +5 enhance, +2 charge, +5 morale,luck,competence whatever misc party buff boni and good enhancement will mean he has an attack bonus of +37.
Against the flat-footed balor AC 32 (likely unholy aura up) he can safely deduct 6 for power attack +12 damage.
Damage roll: 1d6+2d6 (holy) +2 (STR), +5 (enhance), +1 (misc, see below), +12 (power attack) for an average 30.
The better part are the stunning fist and quivering palm which hit the poor balor.
Let us assume the monk has at lvl 20 a non-maxed WIS score of 30 (16 initial, 3 stat gains, +6 periapt, +2 inherent boni from tomes, +1 from age; he receives no age penalities at high levels, so could start out quite close to mature age). This means a Fort DC of 30. The balor has a fort save of +26 with unholy aura up. So it saves on a 4 or better. Likely he will, but it's far from certain, since it has to save twice.
Then initiative is rolled. The monk, with possible morale (greater heroism), competence (ioun stone) and luck boost (luck blade) for a total of +6, DEX +9, and improved initiative (total +19, vs balor's +11), is likely to win (plus he can use a luck-reroll from the luck blade).

Then he flurries, with haste, for a total attack bonus of +35/+35/+35/+35/+30/+25 (the charge bonus is no longer around).
Means hitting with another around 160 damage. Plus another stunning fist attack.

If the balor is stunned by now (needs by now to have thrown better than 4 three times), it is defeated. If it can do something, it will likely flee, since with its action, even plus a quickened telekinesis, it is unlikely to overcome the monk's defenses. If he grapples then, the monk will simply launch another flurry with his fists (can use those) to do the remaining 100ish damage (even the damage reduction does not help much, and another stunning fist flies the way of the balor).

Now with limited party support (say, all casters launch greater dispels vs the unholy aura from afar), the situation is greatly aggravated for the balor.

Hope that helped a bit.

- Giacomo

PS: incidently, all pcs at 20lvl are vastly superior to CR 20 monsters, from higher equipment alone.
EDIT: just noticed, that with 2nd round fists attack alone the damage reduction will be too substantial. An easy way out is a medium ring of spell storing with divine power in it (and maybe divine favor) for some monkzilla activity. Then the balor is toast in 1.5 rounds.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-05-24, 02:02 PM
I also want to take this away from the direction of "OMG a wizard can beat a monk!" vs "No way, the monk will totally stop any caster class." D&D isn't primarily about PvP.
No. But many BBEGs are human(oid)s with a plethora of PC class levels. I think "class X can totally beat class Y" has a place in just about any discussion of class balance for that reason.

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-24, 02:05 PM
No. But many BBEGs are human(oid)s with a plethora of PC class levels. I think "class X can totally beat class Y" has a place in just about any discussion of class balance for that reason.Agree, but what usually happens is it becomes the entire debate, with both sides creating these ultra-specialized builds to take each other down. And that ceases to be constructive.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-05-24, 02:17 PM
Agree, but what usually happens is it becomes the entire debate, with both sides creating these ultra-specialized builds to take each other down. And that ceases to be constructive.
Yeah. That can be a problem.

Indon
2007-05-24, 02:18 PM
No. But many BBEGs are human(oid)s with a plethora of PC class levels. I think "class X can totally beat class Y" has a place in just about any discussion of class balance for that reason.

Well, then. A monk could _totally_ beat up a rogue; just target their weak fort save with stunning fist until they're unarmed and proceed to crush the life out of them. Or a bard, especially a bard with legions of minions in the way; the monk just tumbles past the minions, pins the bard (for the silence option, of course), drags him off and crushes the life out of him. Mind that the monk could, instead, just smash them to death, bards and rogues aren't the toughest classes on the block.

He stands a good chance against a ranger-type as well, though heaven forfend I actually remember what Deflect Arrows does because my monks generally haven't been shot at by the like.

Anything that can out-hit the monk in melee, he can pick up a crossbow (or shruiken!) and stay out of its' reach indefinitely while picking off bits and pieces of precious class level health.

Of course, another excellent reason PvP doesn't matter in the least in class discussions is that D&D rarely has one-man parties, so it doesn't really matter if the monk can kite that warrior to death since the monk's going to have friends who can help him.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-24, 04:16 PM
<...snip...>
Actually, in PvP the monk is naturally strong vs casters since it is his specialty to take down individual BBEGs, hamper them, or obstruct their spellcasting.
But a Balor challenge? You asked the right player...:smallbiggrin:
</snip>


I noticed a few possible problems with your scenario:


A good thing is that the monk can easily get to within 240ft (outside true seeing, so a simple potion of invisiblity plus maxed move silently does the trick) and still is able to charge thanks to 90ft base speed and haste (say, boots of speed). So the monk gets the surprise round. If the encounter is already underway, sneak/move away (he's faster than the balor and could use non-counterable abundant step if threatened by the balor's greater dispel magic) and retry.

- Balors have True Seeing on all the time. You won't be able to 'sneak' up to him too easily. Level 20 with a +9 dex, Hide and MS will be at +32 without any feats or items, compared to the Balor's spot and listen of +38. That said, the monk will be hard pressed to surprise this thing.


He charges, strikes with holy, ki, staff +5 (+8 weapon total). This, with BAB of +15, +9 DEX, +1 haste, +5 enhance, +2 charge, +5 morale,luck,competence whatever misc party buff boni and good enhancement will mean he has an attack bonus of +37.

- How is he weapon finessing a staff (unless this is some splat book feat or ability, I'm not sure...)? Bonus should be +30 with the other bonuses you mentioned and a +2 str (mentioned below).


Against the flat-footed balor AC 32 (likely unholy aura up) he can safely deduct 6 for power attack +12 damage.
Damage roll: 1d6+2d6 (holy) +2 (STR), +5 (enhance), +1 (misc, see below), +12 (power attack) for an average 30.

- Deduct 6, and your attack bonus (using the above example) is +24, far from a sure hit, twice as likely to miss as the balor is to miss his save on your stunning fist. Also, average 30 damage is reduced by 15 thanks to DR/Cold Iron and Good.



The better part are the stunning fist and quivering palm which hit the poor balor.
Let us assume the monk has at lvl 20 a non-maxed WIS score of 30 (16 initial, 3 stat gains, +6 periapt, +2 inherent boni from tomes, +1 from age; he receives no age penalities at high levels, so could start out quite close to mature age). This means a Fort DC of 30. The balor has a fort save of +26 with unholy aura up. So it saves on a 4 or better. Likely he will, but it's far from certain, since it has to save twice.
Then initiative is rolled. The monk, with possible morale (greater heroism), competence (ioun stone) and luck boost (luck blade) for a total of +6, DEX +9, and improved initiative (total +19, vs balor's +11), is likely to win (plus he can use a luck-reroll from the luck blade).

- I'll grant that you may win initiative, but your one possible hit with the staff likely hasn't dealt much damage, or succeeded in stunning him. And there likely won't be a surprise round (see above).


Then he flurries, with haste, for a total attack bonus of +35/+35/+35/+35/+30/+25 (the charge bonus is no longer around).
Means hitting with another around 160 damage. Plus another stunning fist attack.

- +30 attack bonus if you're using the staff (no WF bonus on a staff). Technically, this is your first rond of combat assuming no surprise, so you only get one hit (albeit with the charge).


If the balor is stunned by now (needs by now to have thrown better than 4 three times), it is defeated. If it can do something, it will likely flee, since with its action, even plus a quickened telekinesis, it is unlikely to overcome the monk's defenses. If he grapples then, the monk will simply launch another flurry with his fists (can use those) to do the remaining 100ish damage (even the damage reduction does not help much, and another stunning fist flies the way of the balor).

- The balor is more than likely not stunned yet (stunning fist can be done once a round, and you never specified anything that changed that fact). He doesn't need to grapple, he can just entangle the monk in the whip and make him waste his attacks trying to get out (full round action to get un-entangled), meanwhile the balor will be having his way with him. If he does try to grapple, the fists will not be able to hit him, and will be hard pressed to deal any significant damage (you'll be doing 2d10+2 damage... average of 13, not enough to beat his DR).



Now with limited party support (say, all casters launch greater dispels vs the unholy aura from afar), the situation is greatly aggravated for the balor.

Hope that helped a bit.

- Giacomo

Sort of... It showed that a monk needs to jump through ALOT of hoops to tackle a balor (in my version, he likely loses). This also assumes that the Balor isn't flying around (a sound tactic), in which case your monk is sitting around all silly looking wondering what to do, and being able to jump up and hit him IF he comes in close enough. A fighter with a cold iron +8 weapon will be doing alot more damage, and hitting alot more frequently, and have more hit points, plus, he can bring the pain with a bow if the Balor is in the air.

All pleasantries aside, about 90% of everyone says that the monk's roll is to be "DEADLY to spellcasters"... I just have a few comments:

- How often do you guys fight casters? I've been through alot of level 1-10 quests, and they're quite rare. What does the monk do for the remaining encounters?

- All of the arguments assume that the caster is going to be alone in an open field with no support.... I'm sure there will be some kind of guard next to the wizard if the wizard can't fly or go ethereal yet that won't just stand by while grapple the mage.

- We have a monk in our party, and he's always the first to get brought to negative hit points (has died multiple times), deals little damage, has a hard time hitting and is generally less useful than a fighter would be. Our group doesn't really mind as long as the player's enjoying himself, and there's five of us, so the main roles are already covered. That said, I don't see how our party would be as effective if one of the other four characters were to suddenly dissapear and we were instead just a party 4. Again, I'm completely fine with playing with someone who wants to play a monk, but it just seems like we'd be in trouble if he had more responsibility.

Amujala
2007-05-24, 05:06 PM
So nearly all of the arguments used either for or against the Monk are situational or hypothetical at best. Perhaps a slightly broader perspective should be taken. I think I can safely assume that we are all comparing the Monk to other classes defining his usefulness to the party (without using the PvP argument of course). Several good points have been made to show that whatever the Monk can do, someone else probably does it better. For my argument I am going to assume that no one has any magical gear whatsoever. Even the playing field a little (and also show that the Monk is always as good as he is not being reliant of stuff).

Skills:

The Monk can sneak around just as well (if not better for speed's sake) than the Rogue or Ranger should hope to. And with access to listen/spot coupled with his high Wis score the Monk should very rarely be caught off guard. He also has access to Diplomacy making him useful out of combat as well.

Defense:

The Monk's AC ought to be sitting somewhere around the fighters at lower levels and should exceed it at higher levels. With a +4 class bonus at level 20 he's already at scale mail level without the penalties associated. Assuming his Dex matches the fighters Dex and the Monk's Wis matches the Fighters Str (for fairness sake putting all stats at 18) the monk receives +12 to AC. The fighter getting the most out of his Dex wears a chain shirt and carries a large shield putting him at +10 to AC. Keeping in mind the Monk suffers no ACP and has both hands free I would say he wins this one.

Offense:

The Monk will hit you more times than any other class. There should be no argument here. The monk's attacks do more damage than any other weapon wielded by a medium size creature at higher levels. And even at lower levels he can be played like a stealth/evasive fighter in which case a d6 or d8 doesn't seem so bad. Also, if you really wanted to, I don't see why you couldn't dropkick or overhead smash someone to gain a 2-handed strength bonus and make effective use of power attack putting you right on par with the fighter.

Abilities:

Alright, you got me here. The monks list of class abilities make him a very specialized kind of combatant. In combat he does what he does and that's all that he does, generally grappling/tripping/disarming/deflecting/distracting maneuvers or punching things...lots. Then again, when it comes to combat, what does the Barbarian do but smash liberally. What does the Rogue do but sneak attack. The Ranger is left with either 2-weapons (which the Monk does better having no off-hand) or ranged attacks. Compared to the Fighter the Monk has very little options as to how he fights so if he's not your thing, just don't play him.

Now as for the PC vs. Balor thing, I was under the impression that the whole party would pitch in a little. Does anyone else find it a little rude that they're just standing around watching to see if the Monk dies or not? Perhaps the Rogue is taking bets. Using the "PC vs. Horrible Icky CR 20 Monster" argument means you have just found a creature the Monk can't beat alone. Congrats. Chances are the other classes would have a hard time unless they were geared to fight such a creature. But now we're getting into more conditional circumstances and famed "what ifs". What if he started at X distance away, what if the Balor was having a bad day, what if there were no buffs, etc. etc. until someone changes the subject. And even then, who decides what is a fair trial and what isn't? I took a few conditional liberties with some of my above statements just to prove a point but ultimately it all comes down to the in-game scenarios and even then, everyone's got a different side of the story.

selfcritical
2007-05-24, 05:45 PM
On that note, why not? Short of creatures you'd never be allowed to play, I've never seen claw attacks that can do more damage than the 2d10 (or even 4d8 with improved natural attack...which would only apply to a monk's natural form) anyway.

You should meet my friend the Elan Psychic warrior then.

Jasdoif
2007-05-24, 05:48 PM
So nearly all of the arguments used either for or against the Monk are situational or hypothetical at best.....For my argument I am going to assume that no one has any magical gear whatsoever.So you're intentionally crippling everyone who uses armor and weapons in order to talk about monks having a higher AC and damage?

Now that's hypothetical.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-24, 05:53 PM
You should meet my friend the Elan Psychic warrior then.

Or my friend, the Human Totemist/Druid/Warshaper (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2417079&postcount=1).

greenknight
2007-05-24, 06:04 PM
Chances are the other classes would have a hard time unless they were geared to fight such a creature.

I posted a Core Rules Only Cleric (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2244519&postcount=389) which wasn't specifically designed to take out a Balor, but could do it in 1 1/2 rounds of combat (plus a bit of preparation time), with minimal risk (there was a 1/400 chance of death). I then showed how that same Cleric could then kill off the Tarrasque on the same day. I've since revised that (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2636278&postcount=36) to take a few non-Core exploits into account. Spellcasters gain that kind of flexibility through their spells.


Even more awesome, since it is common practice for spellcasters to enlarge and polymorph other etc their non-casting combatants. For even more fun, a monk could dump his STR to around 10, get a ring of spell storing and use clerical divine power or rightous might (he could UMD it alternatively). Anyone still arguing for "monk is a weak class"?

Yes, me for one. You are correct in saying Polymorph Any Object is the key to boosting a Monk's power, since that can be cast for relatively low cost and even powerful Polymorph forms can last at least 14 days (if the spell is extended). That allows the Monk to concentrate on building Wisdom, and maybe augment Strength even more through a magical item. A Belt of Giant Strength would be the best item for that, IMO, since otherwise you are using an item which won't be available for each encounter and costs gold to replace (assuming you're paying an NPC Cleric to cast Divine Power or Righteous Might into the ring). But doing that means you have to abandon the Antimagic Field idea you proposed earlier.

But how does that compare to a full spellcaster? At high levels, the spellcaster can find some way of flying, so the Monk would need to counter that (jumping just won't do it, since the spellcaster can be 100' or more off the ground). Spellcasters can also benefit from being Polymorphed, and at high levels many of them can even cast the spell or produce an equivalent effect (Druids in Wild Shape, for example). But unlike the Monk, nearly all high level spellcasters can cast Dispel Magic and/or Greater Dispel Magic, so while their buffs are relatively safe, the Monk's buffs are vulnerable. And they usually have enough spells available that they can find one reasonably well suited to the occasion.

As for a Monk being able to defeat summoned monsters, a high level spellcaster has two ways of overcoming that. First, summon multiple monsters over two or more rounds. Force of numbers will usually be enough to defeat the Monk. This isn't usually the best solution because it would require several castings of fairly high level spells, but it's doable. Two, use the Gate spell, which allows the caster to call in a creature with up to 2x Caster Level HD and control it for caster level rounds. Combined with items which increase caster level (such as an orange ioun stone), this can be used to Gate some very formidable monsters. And because they aren't summoned, they can even enter an AMF without a problem.

JaronK
2007-05-24, 06:05 PM
Defense:

The Monk's AC ought to be sitting somewhere around the fighters at lower levels and should exceed it at higher levels. With a +4 class bonus at level 20 he's already at scale mail level without the penalties associated. Assuming his Dex matches the fighters Dex and the Monk's Wis matches the Fighters Str (for fairness sake putting all stats at 18) the monk receives +12 to AC. The fighter getting the most out of his Dex wears a chain shirt and carries a large shield putting him at +10 to AC. Keeping in mind the Monk suffers no ACP and has both hands free I would say he wins this one.

You're forgetting the problems of MAD. The fighter doesn't need high dex. He can wear mithral full plate with a dex of 16, for +11 to AC before adding magical enchantments... and let's be honest, fighters aren't going to use shields. Remember though, this is a level 20 fighter. Of course he's going to have at least mithral full plate. So our fighter has 1 lower AC, but he also has a much better strength score, since your monk put 18 into Wisdom and Dexterity. Your monk is unlikely to have nearly as good of a Con score, since we're not assuming 46 point buy, and he's got 1d8 HD instead of 1d10, so that's 21 more hitpoints he doesn't have. Thus, the monk can't take as much punishment, though obviously his saves against reflex and will targeting things will be better. I'd call it a wash.


Offense:

The Monk will hit you more times than any other class. There should be no argument here.

False. A level 20 monk has an attack ruetine of +15/+15/+15/+10/+5. But remember, you pumped his dex and wisdom for the earlier example, so his strength isn't very high... let's say 16, since he's got some gear on. So that's a +2 to all of those.

For comparison: A level 20 Warblade can make an attack ruetine of +20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10/+5/+5 with Time Stands Still, or +20/+16/+12/+8/+4/+0... until he misses with Avalanche of Blades, or +20/+20 for every creature in his threatened range with Adamantium Hurricane... and he can use all three of those back to back to back. Plus, he has a higher strength score, so add even more there.

A Scout 4/Fighter 6/Dervish 10, dual wielding, can whip out +22/+22/+22/+22/+22/+22/+19/+19/+19/+19/+14/+14/+14/+14/+9/+9/+9/+9 during the dervish dance once per day, or half that during normal dances, and he doesn't need wisdom either. If 5 of those fighter levels were tempest instead, all those numbers would be 2 higher.

Even a basic Fighter 20 dual wielding has +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3/+3, which is comperable to your monk.

A Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker has +20/+15/+10/+5, which doesn't sound like much, but with Complete Champion they can have pounce at level 1, so they can make all those attacks on the charge, while the monk gets a measly 1 attack if he has to move. The dervish, by the way, can also make all those attacks on the move.

So no. The monk will not hit more times.


The monk's attacks do more damage than any other weapon wielded by a medium size creature at higher levels.

False again. At high levels, they're doing an average of 11 damage per hit, plus their strength mod (2d10). With Improved Natural Attack this gets a little better. By comparsion, that barbarian charges and does +120 damage with every hit. Base die damage pales in comparison to how much you can power attack for... and monks are stuck with 1:1 power attack returns with their unarmed strikes. They also can't get through many forms of DR, while others can. This often leaves monks unable to actually hurt their target. Yes, the dice they roll turn up more damage than a greatsword... but the important things (DR penetration, Power Attack Returns, extra damage from sneak attack and similar abilities) aren't there for a monk, so they do less damage. Also, your strength is lower, and you only get 1X strength mod to damage. Every example I cited above for number of hits does more damage than a monk with each hit, even assuming the same strength score.


And even at lower levels he can be played like a stealth/evasive fighter in which case a d6 or d8 doesn't seem so bad. Also, if you really wanted to, I don't see why you couldn't dropkick or overhead smash someone to gain a 2-handed strength bonus and make effective use of power attack putting you right on par with the fighter.

If you could do that, it would help, but you can't by RAW.

JaronK

Amujala
2007-05-24, 07:58 PM
Jaronk. You make some very valid points. There are other classes that get more attacks/round than the Monk. Granted most of the examples listed are out of additional books. I should have specified. No core class can beat the monk for hits/round. Though you are correct, the fighter comes pretty damn close and retains a better attack bonus.

To anyone who mentioned that I didn't use gear in my arguments:
I said no magic items. I said nothing about mundane equipment. The reason I exclude magic gear is this; you give the fighter +5 armor, I give the monk Ring of Nat. Armor +5. You give the Fighter a +5 weapon, I give the Monk "Cloth Wraps, +5" so his unarmed attacks are now +5 weapons. And I figure that's totally fair. We could go back and forth giving our favored class magical goodies to prove our points and get nowhere because they can always balance out. The best way to judge a class is by looking at the class itself, not the gear it uses.

In regards to ability to take punishment I would agree it's about even. The fighter can take more punishment but is more likely to get hit and doesn't get evasion. The monk is less likely to have a high con but does have evasion, better saves and has all sorts of abilities to get himself out of that kind of trouble. And I think the ability to heal himself (Wholeness of Body) pretty well balances out the 1 less hit point he gets per level (assuming average die rolls). But as for the AC issue, alright, give your fighter plate mail. he gets +9 and +2 for shield (if he so desires) which is still 1 point below the monks total AC bonus (and I thought 18 dex and wis was pretty reasonable for level 20) As well, his ACP is enormous and he only moves 20ft per round compared to 90. Mithral plate is all well and good but I have already gotten into the "what-if" game above. You get Mithral Fullplate, I get Periapt of Wisdom +6, and we keep doing that until someone runs out of item ideas.

Damage, any good DM should let you use the dropkick/overhead smash maneuver to gain a 1:2 power attack ratio. I mean why not, you are using 2 hands technically. And though the monk will not always have a high Str score, his weapon at level 20 does more than anyone else's. 2d10 vs. at best 2d8 (which is mercurial greatsword I think). So it is exactly what I said. I never said he would do overall as much damage as a barbarian or or fighter but merely that his weapon had the potential to inflict great pain. Really, if you wanted to play a buffed up monk (I have seen it) he could obliterate things. 2d10 + 6 Str + 10 Power Attack using a "Double-Axe-Handle" technique. Still not as much as specialized fighter or Barbarian, but getting there (and he can deal that in a grapple where your barbarian reverts to 1d4 + Str).

DR. Another valid point but easily countered with the cloth wraps mentioned above. If another character can have a big sword that works against demons why can't the monk possess such an item as well? Just because it doesn't exist in the pre-made magic items list doesn't mean there couldn't be such a thing. Though admitedly that would be a little harder to find than a +1 longsword, it is possible.

JaronK
2007-05-24, 08:18 PM
Jaronk. You make some very valid points. There are other classes that get more attacks/round than the Monk. Granted most of the examples listed are out of additional books. I should have specified. No core class can beat the monk for hits/round. Though you are correct, the fighter comes pretty damn close and retains a better attack bonus.

Ah, I didn't realize we were just using core. Fighter wins, Barbarian wins, Ranger wins, all at the number of hits thing. In fact, all the pure melees win, as do the hybrids, as does the Druid. So, still wrong. The fact is, a monk's 3/4 BAB is a big problem... it means he gets only one more attack than a Ranger/Barbarian/Fighter/Paladin, and none of his attacks can be as high as those guys can get. Thus, fewer hits. The Druid of course blows them all away (Wildshape into a Dire Bear. Win.). Sure, the Monk gets one more attack than the others at a reduced chance to hit, with his base +15 to hit and lower strength, but missing more often than other guys is not a perk.


To anyone who mentioned that I didn't use gear in my arguments:
I said no magic items. I said nothing about mundane equipment. The reason I exclude magic gear is this; you give the fighter +5 armor, I give the monk Ring of Nat. Armor +5. You give the Fighter a +5 weapon, I give the Monk "Cloth Wraps, +5" so his unarmed attacks are now +5 weapons. And I figure that's totally fair. We could go back and forth giving our favored class magical goodies to prove our points and get nowhere because they can always balance out. The best way to judge a class is by looking at the class itself, not the gear it uses.

You're ignoring the fact that "cloth wraps +5" are not an actual item. There is an amulet for that, but it costs 50% more, and only lets you have the bonus, not the special abilities. More likely, you'd use Magic Fang to get the bonus, but you still don't get the special abilities like Corosive, Valorous, Metaline, Sure Striking, Keen, Etc. Also, the Fighter can get +5 Mithral Full Plate... and a +5 Ring of Natural Armour. The Monk can't. You do have to judge gear restrictions when you do this.


In regards to ability to take punishment I would agree it's about even. The fighter can take more punishment but is more likely to get hit and doesn't get evasion. The monk is less likely to have a high con but does have evasion, better saves and has all sorts of abilities to get himself out of that kind of trouble. And I think the ability to heal himself (Wholeness of Body) pretty well balances out the 1 less hit point he gets per level (assuming average die rolls). But as for the AC issue, alright, give your fighter plate mail. he gets +9 and +2 for shield (if he so desires) which is still 1 point below the monks total AC bonus (and I thought 18 dex and wis was pretty reasonable for level 20) As well, his ACP is enormous and he only moves 20ft per round compared to 90. Mithral plate is all well and good but I have already gotten into the "what-if" game above. You get Mithral Fullplate, I get Periapt of Wisdom +6, and we keep doing that until someone runs out of item ideas.

Compare the cost of a Periapt of Wisdom +6 to Mithral Fullplate.

The fact is, gear for a Monk is more expensive. It simply costs more for a monk to get that high AC you keep claiming he can get for free.


Damage, any good DM should let you use the dropkick/overhead smash maneuver to gain a 1:2 power attack ratio. I mean why not, you are using 2 hands technically.

Why not? Because Power Attack specifically says natural weapons get 1:1 returns. You're house ruling again, just like you did with the cloth wraps. Sure, we can all agree that with the right house rules, monks can be powerful, but that's true of any class, even the Complete Warrior Samurai.


And though the monk will not always have a high Str score, his weapon at level 20 does more than anyone else's. 2d10 vs. at best 2d8 (which is mercurial greatsword I think).

The Fullblade. 2d8, 19-20/X2 Critical. As compared to 2d10, 20/X2 critical. Let's be really generous to the monk... we'll give them both a strength of 18, even though we know the standard melee class would be higher, due to the monk pumping dex and wis. Even without power attack, the full BAB melee averages 15 damage per non critical attack to the monk's 15 damage... an equal score. Except the Fullblade criticals twice as often and gets better power attack returns (which is a huge thing). So the monk is actually doing less damage, and we stacked that one in favor of the monk. The higher your strength goes, even keeping the two equal, the more the Fullblade pulls ahead. Even a greatsword wins out at 22 strength, which is actually pretty puny for a 20th level character.

The Mercurial Greatsword btw is 2d6 20/X4.


DR. Another valid point but easily countered with the cloth wraps mentioned above. If another character can have a big sword that works against demons why can't the monk possess such an item as well? Just because it doesn't exist in the pre-made magic items list doesn't mean there couldn't be such a thing. Though admitedly that would be a little harder to find than a +1 longsword, it is possible.

That's the thing. To get around the problem, you just invented a new rule. You can't do that.

JaronK

greenknight
2007-05-24, 08:23 PM
you give the fighter +5 armor, I give the monk Ring of Nat. Armor +5. You give the Fighter a +5 weapon, I give the Monk "Cloth Wraps, +5"

Hold on. Neither a ring of natural armor nor a set of cloth wraps exist in any published book, as far as I know. It's an amulet of natural armor and an amulet of mighty fists you're thinking of. And that shows the problem - a character can only benefit from one magical amulet at a time. You could combine them or move the slot but they then become much more expensive. And I haven't even touched on the third "amulet" type item you might want - a Periapt of Wisdom.


The best way to judge a class is by looking at the class itself, not the gear it uses.

The gear enhances the class, and as I pointed out above, some gear slots get mighty crowded for some classes.


Damage, any good DM should let you use the dropkick/overhead smash maneuver to gain a 1:2 power attack ratio. I mean why not, you are using 2 hands technically.

Because you're getting all those unarmed attacks you mentioned, which aren't even necessarily attacks using the arms. The rules require the use of a two handed weapon to get the 1:2 power attack ratio, and that's not what a Monks unarmed attacks are about.


his weapon at level 20 does more than anyone else's. 2d10 vs. at best 2d8

Except that a magical weapon can have enhancements like fire, cold, electrical damage etc. As the rules stand, Monks don't get that.

Jasdoif
2007-05-24, 08:34 PM
You're ignoring the fact that "cloth wraps +5" are not an actual item. There is an amulet for that, but it costs 50% more, and only lets you have the bonus, not the special abilities. More likely, you'd use Magic Fang to get the bonus, but you still don't get the special abilities like Corosive, Valorous, Metaline, Sure Striking, Keen, Etc.To be here fair, you should be able to use gauntlets for precisely this purpose. Of course, every added bonus the fighter and monk get brings them closer to equal in relative terms.



Also, the Fighter can get +5 Mithral Full Plate... and a +5 Ring of Natural Armour. The Monk can't. You do have to judge gear restrictions when you do this.And heavy fortification, and all the other useful armor abilities. And the ability to use a shield without losing class abilities. A monk could get a ring of force shield, sure; but that's only +2 AC and it takes up a ring slot. A fighter could have a +1 animated heavy shield for +3 to AC, have room for more special abilities or more AC bonus, still have both hands free for a weapon, and have that ring slot available for something else.

The monk hits the magic item slot limit sooner and is even behind at that point.

13_CBS
2007-05-24, 08:48 PM
Again, it seems to me that monks must devote more effort and resources to MATCH the effectiveness of the other classes (or, as many people want to do, defeat them in battle). O_o

JaronK
2007-05-24, 09:08 PM
To be here fair, you should be able to use gauntlets for precisely this purpose. Of course, every added bonus the fighter and monk get brings them closer to equal in relative terms.

Except monks aren't even proficient with gauntlets. And you can't use them that way, to top it off. No dice. Again, yes, if you use house rules to pump up monks, they become stronger. But that's not RAW. And when we're talking about using house rules to bring monks up to the level of fighters, you know there's a problem.

So yeah, monks have problems. Their strengths aren't that helpful (yay I can run fast!) either.

JaronK

Jasdoif
2007-05-24, 09:15 PM
And you can't use them that way, to top it off.Why not, though? They're listed as weapons so they should be valid to make into magic weapons, and their text says they're considered an unarmed strike except they always deal lethal damage and a character is always considered armed when using them so they should do a monk's unarmed damage as their base. I can understand if they weren't allowed as part of a flurry, but other then that?

Fax Celestis
2007-05-24, 10:05 PM
I name two feats to make the monk into a better fighter (and it uses a trick that nearly no other fighter class can make decent use of):

Open Least Chakra (Hands): Requires level 6 and Con 13, but lets you open your Hands chakra (and has the side effect of giving you a +1 insight on Climb and Swim).

Shape Soulmeld (Sphinx Claws): Requires Con 12. If you did the former, you can do this one. Taking this feat and using it to acquire the Sphinx Claws soulmeld is terrific, as it gives you a +1 bonus to Strength-based checks...and lets you full attack with natural weapons at the end of a charge when it's bound to your hands. A monk's fists are natural and manufactured weapons according to the class's description.

With two feats--basically at level 6--you can now flurry at the end of a charge attack, getting a +2 bonus to attack rolls when doing so (due to charging), which negates the penalty for flurrying. Later on, if you go TWF and use this tactic, you can full attack flurry and include your TWF attacks at the end of a charge at virtually no penalty: at level 9, the monk's flurry penalty disappears, and the charge's attack bonus negates the TWF penalty perfectly. Sure, you take a -2 penalty to AC, but if there's one thing that a monk has too much of, it's AC. How does a +15/+15/+15/+10/+5/+15/+10/+5 (+Str) at the end of a charge sound?

Of course, the monk still has other problems to deal with (such as flight), but its' a step in the right direction. Honestly, I think of those two feats as a must-have for monks, just as Adaptive Style is a must-have for swordsages.

JaronK
2007-05-24, 10:46 PM
Why not, though? They're listed as weapons so they should be valid to make into magic weapons, and their text says they're considered an unarmed strike except they always deal lethal damage and a character is always considered armed when using them so they should do a monk's unarmed damage as their base. I can understand if they weren't allowed as part of a flurry, but other then that?

There's been a few comments on the subject from official sources, all of which saying that gauntlets are A) not monk weapons and B) do standard unarmed damage, but leathal, not monk unarmed damage.

Plus monks are proficient either.

JaronK

Aquillion
2007-05-25, 01:43 AM
? No class does that. I do not understand. Saves are defensive in nature. You have the best saves (like the monk has in core), you are best in that. If saves are most often needed vs spells, you are the best vs spellusers in that aspect. There is no arguing around it.That is flatly wrong. Saves, in fact, only help a little with killing spellcasters, and only cover a portion of surviving against them. Good saves do nothing to help you get close to a caster, nothing to let you stay next to them long enough to use that vital full attack, and nothing to bypass any of their core magical defenses, while casters have several options available to hit targets without requiring saves (none of which they're going to actually use against a monk, of course, because the monk is not as serious a threat as the rest of their party.) In any case, a class that has no special support for any of those things is not a particularly effective against casters.


What kind of DM would that be? Allowing casters to automatically succeed at everything?
First of all, the above problems are there for all non-caster classes, but the monk has the best ways to avoid them.
Second, the dim-door problem is shared by all who use it, whether from spell (including the quickend version), or item, or class ability. So it proves nothing. It still is a good thing to escape. It should never be used for offense (neither by spellcasters).
Third, there are so many ways to obstruct spellcasters and foil their power, even as non-casters, that I should try to do some sort of Anti-LogicNinja'sGuide-Thread somewhere, because I see it so often ignored on this board. Suffice to say that movement is king in all combat, and casters need most often distance to their opponents to work best. Yes, there are many ways to stop an attacker, but yes, there are as many ways to bypass a caster's defenses.

They don't? Well, casters can be played defensively, but then they are likely to lose in the long run since they run out of spells/need to refresh spells, while the monk needs not to refresh his class abilities (except the rare perday-abilities).These are not obscure, complicated, or optimized defenses I'm talking about here. Flying, invisiblity, teleportation, and battlefield manipulation are the basic, basic building blocks of a mage's defenses, and can be set up easily with two or three spells at most; arguing that they shouldn't be taken into consideration is like arguing that your monk could beat a fighter if they wasted all their feats on Skill Focus: Basketweaving and didn't have a weapon, or any armor.

A class that has no special way with dealing with any of these defenses has no special talent for fighting wizards. The supposed monk effectiveness in that role is completely and totally myth; the only time they're good at fighting casters is when the caster just lets the monk walk up and punch them without making any effort to evade or escape, in which case, as I noted above, anyone could kill wizard.


No class can. Even spellusers have to get the spell and CAST it. That may be countered, dispelled, not last that long etc. Even overland flight is not that great, since it allows only movement of 40ft. If a caster flies up, that speed is halved. Guess whose jump (boosted virutally sky-high due to high movement) is going to catch that caster? Here, a grapple may be useful, but a stunning fist is much better.
Plus, due to the reasons I outlined above in another post, the monk has most gold to spare for fly and other items of all non-caster classes, because he has most class abilities.As we've illustrated time and again, the monk is actually a very, very expensive class to play. His severe limitations in terms of equipment don't mean that he doesn't need that equipment; it means he pays through the nose for it. Instead of weapons, he needs expensive items to enhance his attacks; instead of armor, he needs absurdly expensive stat-boosters and magical AC+ equipment.


they have spot and listen as class abilities, plus high WIS most of the time. If they get some kind of obscuring mist effect up, this levels the playing field with blind-fight feat immensly :smallbiggrin: And, of course, they could get see invisibility via an item more easily than other non-casters who need to buy their armour, weapons, protection material first.Again: Monks need armor, weapons, and protection material just like anyone else. They just have to pay for absurdly expensive versions of it.

And, seriously, jumping? Have you actually, um, read the rules on that? Jumping is not an effective way of hitting opponents in the air without extreme magical support. Jumping 20 feet straight up has a DC of 80. Monks get, let's see, 24 from their extra movement, plus a bit from their normal movement. Their str bonus is limited by their MAD; their skill points are, too, but even with maxed jump skill you're going to need a roll above 20 to hit someone in the air. Jumping can work on low-flying opponents who stay close to make melee attacks, but not on flying casters.

This assumes, of course, that the mage isn't using Phantom Steed, a common and attractive mode of transportation/defense for for BBEG-caster-types. A caster with that is untouchable... at level 14, it flies at a speed of 240 feet and lasts all day.


Yep, but what if the monk with hat of disguise (or seeming spell from the party wizard if you do not have one ready) poses as a fighter in plate mail or a brute barbarian? Who then wastes his prescious spells trying to charm him vs still mind? :smallsmile: And, btw, charm does not work that way...you cannot order your best friend to attack his friends...for this, you need a carefully worded suggestion or a dominate person effect overcoming one will save per round.A barbarian or a caster with a hat of disguise to disguise themselves as a monk would do better. A fighter with a hat of disguise to make themselves look like a commoner would do better. In fact, anyone would do better.

Monks are simply not that good at fighting casters. There are good anti-mage classes out there. The best, of course, are other casters, which is perfectly fair... mages are supposed to be swiss army knives, the people you turn to for weird and unexpected problems, so it stands to reason that you'd use a caster to stop another caster.

Let's compare monks to Psychic Warriors, though... I like to do that. I think it helps show what's really wrong with the way monks are designed. Psywars are a decent anti-caster class, really. They can boost their saves as a swift action, run up the walls to hit flying opponents, completely negate many of the nastiest disabling abilities, dimension door themselves more than once per day, teleport as a move action so they can actually do something when they arrive, make full attacks after a charge, protect themselves specifically from dispel magic, reduce the effectiveness of invisibility with things like Scent, and so forth. They don't get flight specifically, but can pick it up easily with Expanded Knowledge using one of their psywar bonus feats if they want.

What do monks have? After all this talk, the supposedly killer anti-wizard abilities that a monk has boil down to this:

* High movement,
* High saves and touch AC,
* One Dimension-Door Equivilent per day, learned late,
* And stunning fist.

Add to this one other ability of note,
* Lots of hits (at low BAB, no weapon enchancment, whatever... others have covered that.)

The Psywar's answer to Stunning Fist is Psionic Lion's Charge; instead of making a single attack at low BAB (which may miss, even against a wizard) and then risking everything on one save (which even a wizard might make), a Psywar can burn PP to full attack after a charge for heavily increased damage that will kill a wizard dead instead of just stunning them.

The psywar has 2 good saves to a monk's 3 (the important ones, nach), and can boost those to godlike while boosting the third to decent if necessary. Touch AC can be increased in the same way. They can do this as an immediate action in an emergency. More importantly, though, Psywars get things like Freedom of Action and Mind Blank naturally, which often means they don't have to make saves in the first place. (They can also totally negate energy attacks if anyone feels like blasting them for whatever reason.)

Psywars get multiple dimension doors and can do it as a move action. No contest here. They can also get basic teleportation abilities earlier.

Finally, movement. In addition to the aforementioned dimension doors, psywars get burst and hustle. While they have to pay for it, they can get as much movement as they need in a pinch; they're one of the most freely mobile classes in the game.

This is just using a few of their powers; they can take many more. And if they want to spend some of their bonus feats on Expanded Knowledge, they have all sorts of other options available. Most importantly, psywars aren't limited to fighting mages... they have lots of advantages there (including everything monks have and many more), but even a somewhat caster-focused psywar can still accomplish lots of useful things. They also have versatility in their build from their bonus feats and power selections, where monks don't.

Sure, monks get more attacks than psywars at the same BAB... on paper. But psywars have Psionic Lion's Charge, so unlike monks they actually get to use all their attacks, and they can boost their to-hit if that BAB ever isn't enough to land an attack.

Psywars are an example of how to make a good 'trick-monkey' melee class, the kind of class monks were trying to be. None of the psywar powers, except maybe Lion's Charge (which is limited by their lowish BAB) are individually especially overpowering (in fact, in many cases they're weaker or more limited versions of other classes' abilities, learned later). But they all collectively work together to support the class--a psywar has exactly the abilities that they ought to have. A monk... doesn't.

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-25, 01:45 AM
Lets see a lvl 20 Fighter with a set of +5 mithril Plate, +5 heavy steel shield, Amulet of natural armor +5. And a ring +5, with a 16 Dex, total AC 43

A lvl 20 Monk with bracers +8, Amulet of natural armor +5, Ring +5 Dex (16)22 with gloves of Dex Wis 18(24) with a periapt of Wis, and +4 monk bonus to AC total 45

Now the Fighter has a Str 26 (20) with a +6 belt and a +5 wpn and appropriate feats. His normal attacks are +33 +28 +23 +18 Damage with a +5 Longsword and appropriate feats is 1d8+17. Avg damage 21.5 per hit.
And avg hp with 18 Con is 195.

The Monk with a Str of 14, an Amulet of Mighty Fists +5 and appropriate feats. His normal attacks are +27 +27 +27 +22 +17 Damage with Unarmed strikes is 2d10 +7. Avg damage is 18 points per hit.
Avg hp with a Con of 14 is 133. ( Note he can heal himself for 40 points at any time. )

Init can be important but lets say all damage is dealt at exactly at the same time.
Fighter first
First hit needs 12 thats a 45% chance or lets say 45% of 21.5 avg dam= 9.67
Second hit 17 20% 20% 4.30
Third hit 20 05% 05% 1.07
Fourth hit 20 05% 05% 1.07

On avg the fighter will do 16.11 points per round. The Monks hp will last 10.7 rounds

Now the Monk
First hit needs 16 thats a 25% chance or 25% of 18 avg dam= 4.5
Second hit 16 25% 25% 4.5
Third hit 16 25% 25% 4.5
Fourth hit 20 05% 05% .09
Fifth hit 20 05% 05% .09

On avg the Monk will do 15.3 points per round. The Fighters hp will last 12.74 rounds.

All this without any buffing spells. And the fighter has a better chance of a crit, with a keened wpn or improved crit feats.

Thats why my Monk always use's spring attack with his 90' foot base move. Compared to the fighters 20' base move in Hvy armor. And taunt him while I get 1 free attack every round and stay out of his spring attack/charge range.:smallsmile: Till he drops or cries Uncle!

And if I'm fighting a Balor by myself for some stupid reason ( I hate Vorpal wpns!) Than the feat that turns my hands into Holy wps ( + 2d6 )in the Book of Exaulted Deeds, Plus the one that do's extra damage vs Evil Outsiders ( + 1d8 if memory searves.) Along with Cold Iron wire wrapped around my Knuckles to get passed his DR of 15 Cold Iron and Good. And I do quite well, 2d10+1d8+2d6+7 Avg damage is 29.5 per hit. I need an 8 with the first 3 hits 65% dam = 57.52 fourth hit 40% dam= 11.8 and the last attack at 15% dam = 4.42 damage for a total of 73.7 damage each round. The Balor drops in 3.93 rounds or until my head flies of my body!


At this point doe's anybody still care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-25, 01:50 AM
Now where is that pesky Wizard. I'm going to give him such a stunning pinch!

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 02:00 AM
Thats why my Monk always use's spring attack with his 90' foot base move. Compared to the fighters 20' base move in Hvy armor. And taunt him while I get 1 free attack every round and stay out of his spring attack/charge range.:smallsmile: Till he drops or cries Uncle!Now, suppose the fighter readies an action to attack you when you come in range. Or better yet, uses one of those fancy longbows instead of standing around waiting for you to hit him. What's your contingency for that?

Daniel A. Torre
2007-05-25, 02:16 AM
Spring attack dosn't allow attacks of oppertunity, and since I'm not there when it's his initiative, IE holding his action. I don't believe he gets a swing at me. Though I could be wrong here. Thats what the Spring attack is for.
As to his changing weapons to a BOW. I think I would Spring back up to him and take attacks of opertunity if he shoots, and when he changes weapons in melee. Unless he has quick draw which dosn't provok!

It's late I'll check with you'all tommorrow!

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 02:45 AM
Spring attack dosn't allow attacks of oppertunity, and since I'm not there when it's his initiative, IE holding his action. I don't believe he gets a swing at me. Though I could be wrong here. Thats what the Spring attack is for.Basically he's holding his standard action until you're close enough to hit, then he hits you with his standard action. And yes, that interrupts your spring attack. And a readied action is not an attack of opportunity, so Spring Attack doesn't help you with that.


As to his changing weapons to a BOW. I think I would Spring back up to him and take attacks of opertunity if he shoots, and when he changes weapons in melee. Unless he has quick draw which dosn't provok!Let me just pull up a classic tactic: Five-foot-step out of your threatened area, then full attack with the bow.


Point being, the fighter is not as hopeless as you're leading on. And neither is that balor (which you apparently need to house-rule in wire to combat), who can FLY as fast as you can walk/hustle, to say nothing of its spell-like abilities.

Orzel
2007-05-25, 03:19 AM
Let's look at a recap of the main reason why "monk are weak?"

1) 4 part MAD. Relying on 4 attributes (STR, DEX, WIS, CON) lowers their base accuracy, armor, HP, and feat availability.

2) 3/4 BAB lowers their accuracy a lot and hurts feat availability. This drags them behind ful BABers and makes them mediocre "fighting men".

3) 4x SP and low INT importance keeps them form being a versatile skill monkey. They lack the number of skill points to "skill" for an entire party.

4) Offensive and Defensive restrictions make items cost more than the counterparts of other classes.

5) All of the monk's defenses don't not help solve the problems and encounters the party face.

6) Because of 1-5, there is little reason to choose a monk over other classes to perform a role in a party other that concept and coolness.

Want a fighting guy, pick a full BAB class (fighter, barbarian, paladin...)
Want a skill user, pick a class with 6+ SP a level (rouge, ranger, bard) or 4 SP a level with low MAD (druid, wilder, soulknife).
Want something in the middle that is good at both, get a ranger, druid, soulknife, psiwarrior
Want something in the middle that is okay at both but doesn't die often and runs fast, get a monk

Bassetking
2007-05-25, 03:23 AM
Lets see a lvl 20 Fighter with a set of +5 mithril Plate, +5 heavy steel shield, Amulet of natural armor +5. And a ring +5, with a 16 Dex, total AC 43

A lvl 20 Monk with bracers +8, Amulet of natural armor +5{1}, Ring +5 Dex (16)22 with gloves of Dex Wis 18(24) with a periapt of Wis{2}, and +4 monk bonus to AC total 45

Now the Fighter has a Str 26 (20) with a +6 belt and a +5 wpn and appropriate feats. His normal attacks are +33 +28 +23 +18 Damage with a +5 Longsword and appropriate feats is 1d8+17. Avg damage 21.5 per hit.
And avg hp with 18 Con is 195.

The Monk with a Str of 14, an Amulet of Mighty Fists +5{3} and appropriate feats. His normal attacks are +27 +27 +27 +22 +17 Damage with Unarmed strikes is 2d10 +7. Avg damage is 18 points per hit.
Avg hp with a Con of 14 is 133. ( Note he can heal himself for 40 points at any time. )


The pressing need for three necks aside, I think I've spotted a flaw in your set-up...

Also, and do consider this, Your monk has a pair of Bracers of Armor +8, where your Fighter has Mithril Full Plate +5.

Your Monk is spending 160,000gp against your fighter's 62,500gp.

For ONE ITEM.

Your Monk is also spending more for his Ring Vs. Gloves bonus, as he'll have to be paying for one bonus to be a seperate bonus from the first type.



Init can be important but lets say all damage is dealt at exactly at the same time.
Fighter first
First hit needs 12 thats a 45% chance or lets say 45% of 21.5 avg dam= 9.67
Second hit 17 20% 20% 4.30
Third hit 20 05% 05% 1.07
Fourth hit 20 05% 05% 1.07

On avg the fighter will do 16.11 points per round. The Monks hp will last 10.7 rounds

Two Words.

Shock. Trooper.

Our fighter is now needing a... well, since our Monk can only be wearing one amulet at a time, and will benefit more from the Periapt, we'll keep that on him, and say the Monk has an AC of 40. Our Fighter needs to roll a... 20+8+5... Seven, or better to hit.

The Fighter then converts the vast majority of that AC of his directly into damage. Power Attacking, Two-handed.

1d8+40+17, at a 65% success rate.

Average Damage per round = 61.5. Our monk rolls on the Massive Damage Save Vs. Death. Our Monk lasts three rounds, if he makes his saves.



Now the Monk
First hit needs 16 thats a 25% chance or 25% of 18 avg dam= 4.5
Second hit 16 25% 25% 4.5
Third hit 16 25% 25% 4.5
Fourth hit 20 05% 05% .09
Fifth hit 20 05% 05% .09

On avg the Monk will do 15.3 points per round. The Fighters hp will last 12.74 rounds.

His HP will only last Ten rounds after the Monk is a chunky stain?



All this without any buffing spells. And the fighter has a better chance of a crit, with a keened wpn or improved crit feats.

So, let's take that extra 100,000 you've got the Monk spending on things, and re-invest that into the Fighter's Weapon. Let's turn that Longsword into a Screaming, Corrosive Longsword +5.

Now, it's 1d8+2d6+40+17, or 68.5 damage per round. Our Monk now dies in two rounds.[/quote]



Thats why my Monk always use's spring attack with his 90' foot base move. Compared to the fighters 20' base move in Hvy armor. And taunt him while I get 1 free attack every round and stay out of his spring attack/charge range.:smallsmile: Till he drops or cries Uncle!

I'll use the rest of the money the Fighter saved on gear to invest in a pair of "Boots of Striding and Springing". And Charge. 60'. Which is greater than the maximum 45' you're allowed through Spring Attack, and still be attacking me every round.

Further, if you're using Spring Attack, your monk isn't dealing 15.3 damage per round. He's dealing 2d10+7, as the use of Spring Attack denies him his Full Attack Action. IF he beats a 16. Wait, he's not wearing his Amulet of Mighty Fists, is he? Damn... If my fighter has used Shock Trooper, his AC is currently 23. So, in order to hit him with his 2d10+2 (Since, no Amulet o' Mighty Fists) the Monk has to roll an eight.

An Eight.

Yes, even after all of this; after the fighter has removed 20 AC, the Monk still has to out-roll the fighter in order to hit him.



And if I'm fighting a Balor by myself for some stupid reason ( I hate Vorpal wpns!) Than the feat that turns my hands into Holy wps ( + 2d6 )in the Book of Exaulted Deeds, Plus the one that do's extra damage vs Evil Outsiders ( + 1d8 if memory searves.) Along with Cold Iron wire wrapped around my Knuckles to get passed his DR of 15 Cold Iron and Good. And I do quite well, 2d10+1d8+2d6+7 Avg damage is 29.5 per hit. I need an 8 with the first 3 hits 65% dam = 57.52 fourth hit 40% dam= 11.8 and the last attack at 15% dam = 4.42 damage for a total of 73.7 damage each round. The Balor drops in 3.93 rounds or until my head flies of my body!


At this point doe's anybody still care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alright... I'm going to just ignore the part where you wrap your hands in WIRE in order to punch something, as there is nothing in the RAW to provide for that. (And would turn your fist-meats to garrotted Hamburger...)

We'll take our same Shock-trooper fighter; the one that kicked the monk around the floor like a soccer ball.

With his 1d8+2d6+40+17, we're doing 1d8+2d6+40+2 a round, or, 53 Damage.

Without having the entire build and feat-chains revolving around the specifics of killing Balors.

Sorry, friend. The Monk just doesn't stack up against his foe in this situation, or, in most.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 05:51 AM
I noticed a few possible problems with your scenario:

Thanks a lot! You are correct in some, wrong in others, but it helps improve the monk level 20 (core) even more (Daniel E. Torre's calculations btw are not that far off the mark; spring attack for melee with that great move - double that of a similarly enhanced fighter, triple unenhanced, quadruple vs plate mail fighter - is going to cause a sheer melee fighter a headache. Vs an archer fighter with manyshot, the monk loses this way, though).


- Balors have True Seeing on all the time. You won't be able to 'sneak' up to him too easily. Level 20 with a +9 dex, Hide and MS will be at +32 without any feats or items, compared to the Balor's spot and listen of +38. That said, the monk will be hard pressed to surprise this thing.

True seeing only works out to 120ft. If the monk starts to charge invisibly from 240ft (thanks to his 120ft move with boots of speed), that means a -24 for the listen check vs move silently for the balor (against a move silently skill that could be maxed, so no chance to detect the monk sneaking up. In fact, the monk is the only class that can do melee with the balor and charge him unnoticed thanks to this class skill combination).


- How is he weapon finessing a staff (unless this is some splat book feat or ability, I'm not sure...)? Bonus should be +30 with the other bonuses you mentioned and a +2 str (mentioned below).

You are correct! I forgot about that. But I will simply get a high STR with the a trick below. The 1d6, holy, ki, +5 it is with a scroll of bless rendered good (easily used by monk with UMD by lvl 20).


- Deduct 6, and your attack bonus (using the above example) is +24, far from a sure hit, twice as likely to miss as the balor is to miss his save on your stunning fist. Also, average 30 damage is reduced by 15 thanks to DR/Cold Iron and Good.

As I suggested in edit in my post before (you may have missed it), get a ring, or better, get two rings of medium spell storing with rightous might, divine power (which benefits the monk more than all other fighting classes except the rogue) and divine favor (they cost a total of 100,000, affordable for a lvl 20 character). The great thing is that thanks to UMD and his high WIS (not necessarily the case for other fighting classes), he can even afford the scrolls himself and cast the spells into the rings (but simply asking npc spellcasters for a lower fee than scrolls, or ask your party cleric to cast for free is much easier- he will gladly give them to the monk - and himself as well if clericzilla). As a last buff, throw in a potion of good hope (+2 morale bonus to hit and damage).
The spells take the monk to the same size category as the balor (he could even take the grappling route now, but let's leave it at the awesome damage output)
Buff up with those for true Monkzilla power :smallbiggrin: ...
Now...
The attack bonus now adds up to +41 (+20 BAB, +9 STR, +3 luck, +5 enhance, +1 boots of speed, +2 morale, +1 competence).
In the charge surprise round, that is with charge bonus +43 vs flat-footed balor AC of 32, so you can deduct 12 for power attack (+24 damage), 10 in the 1st round (+20 damage).
Damage per hit is otherwise +34 (1d8 enlarged staff, +5 enhance, +18 STR, +3 luck, +2 morale, +1 competence- ioun stone), for a total of 58 in surprise round and 54 in 1st round.
Now how many times does he hit?
once in surprise round, flurry with boots of speed in 1st round for a total of 4 more attacks at highes attack, and 1 more at -5 to hit and thus 10 less power attack damage and 1 more at -10 to hit and thus no power attack bonus damage.
That is...
1x 58 damage in surprise round
4x 54 damage in 1st round
1x 44 damage in 1st round
1x 34 damage in 1st round
For a grand total of 352 damage. Balor dies.

Now...this means the monk can even save up on his stunning fist and quivering palm attacks- but if he were to use those, the balor would have to save vs DC 30 three times, plus another 5 times vs massive damage from the above regular damage.

Now...who is still out there doubting monk power and usefulness? Even greenknight should start to be impressed (the above monk damage output is higher than my archer-fighter's) :smallsmile:



Sort of... It showed that a monk needs to jump through ALOT of hoops to tackle a balor (in my version, he likely loses). This also assumes that the Balor isn't flying around (a sound tactic), in which case your monk is sitting around all silly looking wondering what to do, and being able to jump up and hit him IF he comes in close enough. A fighter with a cold iron +8 weapon will be doing alot more damage, and hitting alot more frequently, and have more hit points, plus, he can bring the pain with a bow if the Balor is in the air.

The balor likely IS NOT flying around since the monk surprises him. The monk can wait for the opportunity. Not even a dragon flies around all the time.
The fighter is equalised in melee by the monk in this respect (surpassed if you count the superior mobility). The monk may not have the zilla spells in the ring all the time (although a party cleric or spare scrolls could mean the monk may do the trick several times in a day), and other fighting classes also could get the zilla spells in rings and UMD (it's quite a sound investment for many purposes), but this is by no means "jumping through ALOT of hoops".

At level 20, all characters will have awesome powers and tend to take a lot of experience to play properly (so far I never played one, I only do these builds to show the balance of classes even at high levels). Even greenknight's build (he linked above in his post) jumps through ALOT of hoops to take out a balor in 1.5 rounds as my archer-fighter or the above monk. Actually, they are more hoops since greenknight's build takes longer to take out the balor and requires various spell combinations (as well as choosing the trickery domain to get time stop, so not all clerics may do this).



All pleasantries aside, about 90% of everyone says that the monk's roll is to be "DEADLY to spellcasters"... I just have a few comments:

- How often do you guys fight casters? I've been through alot of level 1-10 quests, and they're quite rare. What does the monk do for the remaining encounters?

How can spellcasters be "rare", even at lvl 1-10? There are four full caster classes, five if you count the bard as well. That makes it a good part of all higher-level npcs. You may play in a monster-heavy campaign, but if your opponents in lvl 1-10 RARELY use spells, it appears a bit awkward in my eyes.

Additionally, I guess monks can as easily fight any BBEG with inferior hand-to-hand combat skills (not only casters), say rogues or monsters that are weak in that aspect. For the remaining encounters he can still fight quite OK (see above super lvl 20 monk damage), and can (see my prvs posts) help the other classes greatly, at all levels.


- All of the arguments assume that the caster is going to be alone in an open field with no support.... I'm sure there will be some kind of guard next to the wizard if the wizard can't fly or go ethereal yet that won't just stand by while grapple the mage.

In particular in a situation where the enemy caster hides behind minions the monk is the best melee option, because he has the great move and can tumble at higher levels even THROUGH enemy lines (or, he could simply jump over them).
The fly thing (etheralness the monk can even do himself at high levels) has been discussed so many times alreay: in confined spaces, the monk catches the spellcaster with jump. In wider places (say, outside), the party spellcasters will dispel the fly magic (actually flying is quite dangerous for casters without feather fall!), and then the monk gets him. Heck, the monk at high levels and high WIS and rings of spell storing and/or UMD/scrolls can even do the dispelling part himself in emergency (although at lower chances likely than full casters).


- We have a monk in our party, and he's always the first to get brought to negative hit points (has died multiple times), deals little damage, has a hard time hitting and is generally less useful than a fighter would be. Our group doesn't really mind as long as the player's enjoying himself, and there's five of us, so the main roles are already covered. That said, I don't see how our party would be as effective if one of the other four characters were to suddenly dissapear and we were instead just a party 4. Again, I'm completely fine with playing with someone who wants to play a monk, but it just seems like we'd be in trouble if he had more responsibility.

Your party's monk is apparently not played to the best of his abilities. How can it be that he receives most damage? When, as also shown many times above, he should have among the highest AC in the game, plus great saves and other defensive qualities that make him the best defensive class at low-mid levels, possibly on par with spellcasters at high levels. Even some posters who think the monk is weak around here say that the monk is weak due to lack of offensive capabilites (which the above 350+ damage show is not true), not due to defensive capabilites.

- Giacomo

EDIT: forgot to factor in the one more attack from rightous might in my calcualations above. So, it is likely around 380-390 damage total...

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 06:10 AM
Let's look at a recap of the main reason why "monk are weak?"

Good idea for a recap, since posts and thread are quite long.


1) 4 part MAD. Relying on 4 attributes (STR, DEX, WIS, CON) lowers their base accuracy, armor, HP, and feat availability.

As I said before, the monk does not "rely" on more attributes than other clases. Put highest on WIS, then DEX, then CON, then STR, then INT, then CHR. That should do it. Defensive qualities last you enough through the low levels to survive and help your party greatly with your unarmed/disarm combat tricks and skills.
Do not try to believe the "MAD" thing. IT'S A TRAP! (courtesy logicninja) :smallbiggrin:


2) 3/4 BAB lowers their accuracy a lot and hurts feat availability. This drags them behind ful BABers and makes them mediocre "fighting men".

See above my monk vs balor fight and repent :smallsmile:
Before monks get access to UMD/divine power scrolls (or even rings of spell storing), the BAB difference is not that critical and the no. of attacks through flurry is broadly the same. With spring attack route, they could also keep combat to 1 attack each, where the monk may land that decisive disarm or stunning fist or even grapple.


3) 4x SP and low INT importance keeps them form being a versatile skill monkey. They lack the number of skill points to "skill" for an entire party.

If there is no class with 4 or more skill points per level in the party, the monk will have to improvise much more- likely the party scout role will be for him, but that he should do excellently. He cannot completely emulate a rogue, or party face, or scholar, though. That's called class balance...:smallsmile:


4) Offensive and Defensive restrictions make items cost more than the counterparts of other classes.

Let me repeat that because, after all this thread, I still cannot believe it. "Defensive...restrictions"? WHAT?
Recap: Best saves, only class with 24/7 spell resistance, immune to poison, disease, bonus vs enchantment (get +4 if an elf), highest touch AC, possibly highest overall AC, best move. Where are the "restrictions" here?
Now, in the offensive, they do not have the sheer damage output of barbarians (could tweak it a bit with the above monk lvl 20 example), they do not have that many combat feat tricks as the fighter (but they are 2nd to him in that respect, alongside the ranger), they do not get the archery stuff of the ranger (include the spells here), they do not get the special damage bonuses of the rogue or the holy power of the paladin. But again, that is called class balance - because all of the above melee fighters are weaker in defenses than the monk. And the monk is still a formidable offensive force on the battlefield if you make use of his powers (for instance, in unarmed circumstances he is simply the best overall. What if a fight breaks out at the lord's reception where no weapons are allowed? What if the party is doublecrossed without weapons in the masterthief's maze? etc.)


5) All of the monk's defenses don't not help solve the problems and encounters the party face.
6) Because of 1-5, there is little reason to choose a monk over other classes to perform a role in a party other that concept and coolness.

Want a fighting guy, pick a full BAB class (fighter, barbarian, paladin...)
Want a skill user, pick a class with 6+ SP a level (rouge, ranger, bard) or 4 SP a level with low MAD (druid, wilder, soulknife).
Want something in the middle that is good at both, get a ranger, druid, soulknife, psiwarrior
Want something in the middle that is okay at both but doesn't die often and runs fast, get a monk

But yes, they do. (won't go into details anymore here. If you do not want to play the monk, do not play it. But do not get surprised if you come across someone who makes use of a monk's class ability and a DM who does not deal most damage to the monk despite him having the best defenses in the game).

- Giacomo

Fenix_of_Doom
2007-05-25, 06:16 AM
I'm no expert on this matter and I like monks, even though I do think they should have full BAB because they are on the weak side now.

that being said there are a few holes in Amujala arguments.
first monks generally have tougher times with geting armour enchantments right(I belive they need bracers of armor) so cutting all magic items would be unfair.
also the AC of a monk is indeed great if you have 18 Dex and 18 Wis, because of MAD a monk can abuse max roles much better then a fighter or a wizard(I bet people will try prove me wrong:smallbiggrin: ). again unrealistic and not really fair.

Edit: I should shut up, you guys post faster then I can read it all

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 06:40 AM
And to make it three, some responses to greenknight's earlier comments:



You are correct in saying Polymorph Any Object is the key to boosting a Monk's power, since that can be cast for relatively low cost and even powerful Polymorph forms can last at least 14 days (if the spell is extended). That allows the Monk to concentrate on building Wisdom, and maybe augment Strength even more through a magical item. A Belt of Giant Strength would be the best item for that, IMO, since otherwise you are using an item which won't be available for each encounter and costs gold to replace (assuming you're paying an NPC Cleric to cast Divine Power or Righteous Might into the ring). But doing that means you have to abandon the Antimagic Field idea you proposed earlier.

My above lvl 20 revised monk uses rings of spell storing with the zilla spells, which is likely even better than a polymorph (he could also UMD them from a scroll if necessary). A belt of giant strength is a good idea to wear most of the time, thanks! Normally I use a monk's belt for fighter builds because I like boosting touch ACs better at high levels than wearing heavier armour - but a monk does not need a monk's belt, so that spot would be free.
The AMF tactics should only be used vs powerful spellcasters who are otherwise weak in physical combat, not vs balors or dragons or other big monsters.


But how does that compare to a full spellcaster?

Ah, that's an entirely different issue...likely transcending this thread (which is only about - alleged - monk's weaknesses, not about the eternal caster vs non-caster classes debate).


At high levels, the spellcaster can find some way of flying, so the Monk would need to counter that (jumping just won't do it, since the spellcaster can be 100' or more off the ground).

Yep. A monk (without access to archery, although that might be done with jumping through some hoops...:smallsmile: ) has difficulties vs flying foes. So he should
- use jump skills vs low flying foes, or those who are about to fly up (which takes quite long to get outside a monk's jumping range). Inside a dungeon, that will be quite often the case (maybe get a ring of jumping?).
- let party spellcasters use their dispels (which they likely will do, anyhow, lest the foe escapes or is outside the range of the party's meleers and rogue sneak attacks)
- have your own fly effect up. Then you are faster still, since the enhancement bonus from the boots and the extraordinary bonus from the monk class stack.
- wait for an opportunity to strike at the foe when he is not flying. The monk has exactly the skill set spot/listen/move silenty/hide to do that, plus he likely moves faster on land than the foe in the air (a phantom steed even he could take out with volley of arrows or, better yet, get some necklace of fireballs/wand of magic missiles for such purposes).

To sum up: fly is definitely not a big problem for a monk.


Spellcasters can also benefit from being Polymorphed, and at high levels many of them can even cast the spell or produce an equivalent effect (Druids in Wild Shape, for example). But unlike the Monk, nearly all high level spellcasters can cast Dispel Magic and/or Greater Dispel Magic, so while their buffs are relatively safe, the Monk's buffs are vulnerable. And they usually have enough spells available that they can find one reasonably well suited to the occasion.

The monk is still OK I guess,
- The casters need to go first vs the monk to avoid being attacked while the buffs are still up.
- Initiative mod is likely about the same (excepting MoP effects etc)
- his high movement or abundant step cannot be dispelled, so he can easily escape if things go wrong against him. Next time, he may be first.
- Polymorph does not help that much vs the stunning fist attacks, althogh your example cleric is quite powerful in that aspect
- the AMF tactics would be good for the monk to use in any case vs spellcasters, even divine ones (it helps even vs the wildshape, which leavas one physically quite weak druid).



As for a Monk being able to defeat summoned monsters, a high level spellcaster has two ways of overcoming that. First, summon multiple monsters over two or more rounds. Force of numbers will usually be enough to defeat the Monk. This isn't usually the best solution because it would require several castings of fairly high level spells, but it's doable.

Multiple monsters will not stop the monk who just tumbles through them (or uses abundant step and tries from a different angle, or waits in hiding until the monsters disappear). Plus, summoning spells really take to long to cast. A full round casting would be disrupted by the monk's stunning fist (if not the damage).



Two, use the Gate spell, which allows the caster to call in a creature with up to 2x Caster Level HD and control it for caster level rounds. Combined with items which increase caster level (such as an orange ioun stone), this can be used to Gate some very formidable monsters. And because they aren't summoned, they can even enter an AMF without a problem.

Ah, gate...the all-time spellcaster favourite.
AMF does not help here, you are correct. But that is really the DD3.5 nuclear weapon you would be using, so to speak, to erdicate one opponent. There are two drawbacks to the gate tactics (barring infinite titan loops, likely not possible under any DM)

- the monk once again can abundant step to safety in the face of such overwhelming odds. Or run away with his high move and hide. You once said you saw a passage in the DMG that said you receive XP for an encounter even if you have not defeated your opponent (because he escaped and comes back with a vengeance). I have searched and have not found it. If it were not the case, then the caster pays a lot of XP and will still not have defeated the monk.
- the gate calls a creature, willing or UNWILLING. Since calling puts the extraplanar at the risk to actually perish (as opposed to summoning) you can expect that most of the horrors from outer space you called (likely double your hit dice up to 40/50) will not be amused and seek vengeance. It is an npc and thus in the hands of the DM. The spell does not say anything on this, it only strongly hints the possiblity of hostility. So it is up to the DM.

- Giacomo

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-25, 06:41 AM
Let me repeat that because, after all this thread, I still cannot believe it. "Defensive...restrictions"? WHAT?
Recap: Best saves, only class with 24/7 spell resistance, immune to poison, disease, bonus vs enchantment (get +4 if an elf), highest touch AC, possibly highest overall AC, best move. Where are the "restrictions" here?What he means is that monks lose many of their abilities if they wear armor, which means they have to pay for more expensive items (bracers, amulets etc) to boost their AC, while the fighter just puts on enchanted fullplate which is less expensive.

Similarly, the barbarian gets his +whatever weapon, which costs a LOT less than what the monk needs (amulet of might fists). Which, one might add, forces him to CHOOSE between boosted Wisdom, and boosted unarmed attack.

I notice that a lot of the "why monks aren't as bad as you think" posters are just assuming that the DM will allow special fist-enhancing gloves/cloth wraps into the game. Or the aformentioned "wrapping your hands in wire to overcome DR" :smalleek: Now personally, I would allow them, because it sucks for the monk to have to spend way more on the Mighty Fists Amulet. He should be able to enhance his fists the same way the fighter can do his swords. But by RAW, he can't do it. That's a weakness.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 06:46 AM
Edit: I should shut up, you guys post faster then I can read it all

Hi Fenix_of_Doom, no problem.

The AC of a monk is quite high, even at low levels, if you have the party wizard cast mage armour on you, and you have DEX 16 and WIS 16 at the start (a bit high, but doable). Then you are in first level with AC 20 for an hour, which the fighter will need full plate and a large shield for (causing him to be slower, and incurs massive skill check penalties). The fighter makes likely better use of magical armour to have a slighly better AC in levels 1-20, but meanwhile a monk has higher initiative and better movement skill modifiers than the full plate fighter, and a better touch AC (helps vs magic rays and undead attacks that sometimes do not allow saving throws).

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 06:54 AM
@spiderbrigade
Now the amulet of might fist thing is a bit limited.
A monk fares much better (see also the above monk vs balor post)
- taking a ki weapon. So now he is down only +1 enchantment vs the fighter, but can use his stunning fist and quivering palm at the same time with the weapon. No need to beg the DM for strange cold iron wire or adamantine knuckles or some such.
- get some oils of greater magic fang +5 at 3,000 each for that rare occasion that the monk needs to fight with his unarmed strike alone and needs another +5 enhancement bonus. There are also other sources of getting higher attack bonuses
- similarly, there ways to get higher AC without armour and the enhancement bonuses. Since the monk gets WIS to AC plus class AC boni (equalising eventually by lvl 20 a full plate +5 and a shield without enhancement, but without the costs, encumbrance, skill check penalties and cap to DEX bonus), that should be roughly equal.

- Giacomo

Talya
2007-05-25, 07:25 AM
The pressing need for three necks aside,

Aside?

I think it's the biggest flaw in the whole thing, he cannot have an amulet of natural armor +5, a periapt of wisdom +6, AND an amulet of mighty fists +5, period. He must choose one of them. You know this, but why go through the huge calculations with him? Those alone shoot the whole thing to hell.

Vow of Poverty gets around all this. A lot of people don't like it, but a winged LA+0 aasimar (either Lesser Aasimar or Savage Progressions Aasimar, with outsider wings feat) and a vow of poverty is going to end up with far higher melee damage than any other monk, and no really big drawbacks (since they can fly, the only real problem from lack of equipment.) They'll have wisdom bonus to-hit, +8 to wisdom, +5 enhancement to all attacks, and 4d8+2d6 base damage before strength bonus. Couple that with +10 to armor, +a bunch to deflection and natural armor, +6/+4/+2 to three other stats of your choice (mostly solving MAD), and not being prevented from using manuals, tomes, or benefiting from wish spells...and they do alright. If you want to limit them to non-lethal damage, they can be even more effective, but I don't like that option much.

I'd say the monk still needs to have full BAB and be able to flurry as a standard action to be fixed, mind you. It's also broken if the only way to make a monk effective is to take vow of poverty.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-25, 08:14 AM
True seeing only works out to 120ft. If the monk starts to charge invisibly from 240ft (thanks to his 120ft move with boots of speed), that means a -24 for the listen check vs move silently for the balor (against a move silently skill that could be maxed, so no chance to detect the monk sneaking up. In fact, the monk is the only class that can do melee with the balor and charge him unnoticed thanks to this class skill combination).

- You get a -20 penalty to your move silently penalty when running or charging. Monk with +6 wis bonus has a MS skill of +29 plus any miscellaneous bonus, +9 after the -20 penalty. Highest possibly role: 29. Highest possible listen check for the Balor: 39. I still don't see how he can sneak up on the balor. This also assumes that the Balor is in an open area with more than a 120 ft. radius with no hindering terrain.





As I suggested in edit in my post before (you may have missed it), get a ring, or better, get two rings of medium spell storing with rightous might, divine power (which benefits the monk more than all other fighting classes except the rogue) and divine favor (they cost a total of 100,000, affordable for a lvl 20 character). The great thing is that thanks to UMD and his high WIS (not necessarily the case for other fighting classes), he can even afford the scrolls himself and cast the spells into the rings (but simply asking npc spellcasters for a lower fee than scrolls, or ask your party cleric to cast for free is much easier- he will gladly give them to the monk - and himself as well if clericzilla). As a last buff, throw in a potion of good hope (+2 morale bonus to hit and damage).
The spells take the monk to the same size category as the balor (he could even take the grappling route now, but let's leave it at the awesome damage output)
Buff up with those for true Monkzilla power :smallbiggrin: ...
Now...
The attack bonus now adds up to +41 (+20 BAB, +9 STR, +3 luck, +5 enhance, +1 boots of speed, +2 morale, +1 competence).
In the charge surprise round, that is with charge bonus +43 vs flat-footed balor AC of 32, so you can deduct 12 for power attack (+24 damage), 10 in the 1st round (+20 damage).
Damage per hit is otherwise +34 (1d8 enlarged staff, +5 enhance, +18 STR, +3 luck, +2 morale, +1 competence- ioun stone), for a total of 58 in surprise round and 54 in 1st round.
Now how many times does he hit?
once in surprise round, flurry with boots of speed in 1st round for a total of 4 more attacks at highes attack, and 1 more at -5 to hit and thus 10 less power attack damage and 1 more at -10 to hit and thus no power attack bonus damage.
That is...
1x 58 damage in surprise round
4x 54 damage in 1st round
1x 44 damage in 1st round
1x 34 damage in 1st round
For a grand total of 352 damage. Balor dies.

Now...this means the monk can even save up on his stunning fist and quivering palm attacks- but if he were to use those, the balor would have to save vs DC 30 three times, plus another 5 times vs massive damage from the above regular damage.

Now...who is still out there doubting monk power and usefulness? Even greenknight should start to be impressed (the above monk damage output is higher than my archer-fighter's) :smallsmile:

- Damage from surprise hit (in the off chance you get a surprise round) is less than indicated. Str damage is X1.5 on a 2 hander, not doubled, and you're still not getting past his DR. STR damage bonus is +13, which makes damage equal to 38, and 34 on a regular hit. You don't call this jumping through alot of hoops? This mostly tells me that you need cleric buffs and tons of magic items to deal less damage than a fighter would.

Take a fighter, STR 30 (16 base, +5 from levelling, +6 belt, +2 tome). With a +5 holy cold iron greatsword (+7 weapon), and core fighter feats, he has: +20 BaB + 10 Str + 5 enh + 3 luck +1 boots of speed +2 morale +1 competence + 2 GWF = +44... 3 points higher than your best attack with the monk, after being cleric-spell buffed. And the damage: 2d6 + 2d6 holy + 15 STR + 5 Enh + 4 GWS + 3 luck +2 morale +1 competence = 44 before any kind of power attack, 10 points higher than your monk, ALL of it going through DR, plus a crit on a 17-20. And the fighter has a ton of useful feats in the PHBII I could add to make these numbers much higher. Plus, he can use an animated shield to keep up a high AC. And all this before any spell buffs. If I were so inclined, I could use a ring of spell storing to teleport next to the balor from miles away and get a definate surprise round. This is just a generic fighter build with no bells and wistles, just equipment and feats. So yeah, I'm still doubting Monkzilla...



How can spellcasters be "rare", even at lvl 1-10? There are four full caster classes, five if you count the bard as well. That makes it a good part of all higher-level npcs. You may play in a monster-heavy campaign, but if your opponents in lvl 1-10 RARELY use spells, it appears a bit awkward in my eyes.

- It's a published WotC adventure, with a balanced mix of everything (not 'monster-heavy' as you assume). We fight NPCs often, and we fight monsters often. The rare time we fight a spell-caster, he's typically hard to get to, well defended, or not a wizard. WotC published an entire core book based around monsters, so don't get all weirded out when I mention that monster fights happen ever so often.


Additionally, I guess monks can as easily fight any BBEG with inferior hand-to-hand combat skills (not only casters), say rogues or monsters that are weak in that aspect. For the remaining encounters he can still fight quite OK (see above super lvl 20 monk damage), and can (see my prvs posts) help the other classes greatly, at all levels.

- As I've shown with my example, the 'super lvl 20 monk damage' is still less than a generic no thought put into it fighter. And those spells he uses are only round per and minute per level spells, so after an encounter, he's not super for the rest of the day.




In particular in a situation where the enemy caster hides behind minions the monk is the best melee option, because he has the great move and can tumble at higher levels even THROUGH enemy lines (or, he could simply jump over them).

- The guards are still going to slaughter the monk while he engages the caster, and he won't deal significant damage to the caster before he drops.



Your party's monk is apparently not played to the best of his abilities. How can it be that he receives most damage? When, as also shown many times above, he should have among the highest AC in the game, plus great saves and other defensive qualities that make him the best defensive class at low-mid levels, possibly on par with spellcasters at high levels. Even some posters who think the monk is weak around here say that the monk is weak due to lack of offensive capabilites (which the above 350+ damage show is not true), not due to defensive capabilites.

- Giacomo

- How should he have the highest AC in the game? He has 18 Dex, 16 Wis, and chugs a potion of mage armor when needed, for a whopping total of 21 AC, 22 with dodge. My cleric/fighter has full-plate, and a shield, for total of 22 AC all the time (after feats). The problem is that, due to MAD and being an elf, he only has 12 Con, whereas I have 18 (Dwarf). So I can survive alot better than he can. As for attacking, he has +7 (+5/+5 on a flurry) to hit and deals 1d8+2. I have +8 to hit and deal 1d10+3 (+6/+6 on an axe/shield bash). So he's as hard to hit as I am, can't take more than a few hits before he starts hurting, doesn't hit as often and deals less damage. He's great at what I perceive the monk's role to be: melee support/scouter, but he has too much of a glass jaw to be more than that right now. This is done with point buy (albeit too many points for my liking), so it's not a matter of 'rolling crappy stats'.

Talya
2007-05-25, 08:23 AM
- How should he have the highest AC in the game? He has 18 Dex, 16 Wis, and chugs a potion of mage armor when needed, for a whopping total of 21 AC, 22 with dodge.

1) No monk should prioritize dex over wisdom. (Minor point, mostly irrelevant, only matters flatfooted.)
2) What level are you suggesting here? Early on it's easier for a fighter to have higher armor class due to the availability of cheap full plate and no need for dex. That does not continue as you level up...

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-25, 08:56 AM
1) No monk should prioritize dex over wisdom. (Minor point, mostly irrelevant, only matters flatfooted.)
2) What level are you suggesting here? Early on it's easier for a fighter to have higher armor class due to the availability of cheap full plate and no need for dex. That does not continue as you level up...

1) Prioritizing wisdom means it's even harder for him to hit enemies, giving him the same AC with -1 penalty to hit.

2) We're at level 4, with level 3 equipment funding (though we found a good sum of gold recently). I don't see how I'll get surpassed as we level, unless the DM makes it a habit of handing out bracers of armor. The monk'll be paying ALOT more for his AC boosts than I will. This isn't taking into consideration potions of cat's grace or owl's wisdom, but that's going to suck up his resources quickly.

Tola
2007-05-25, 09:03 AM
Simply put, Lack Of Magic Items. As in: they have none. At all. At least going by the SRD. There's nothing specifically for them. Which takes you into the land of Custom Magic Items.

Someone earlier mentioned in passing that in things like Neverwinter Nights, monks were better to use.

Standard D&D Monks would KILL for the stuff given as storeboughts in something like Neverwinter Nights.

Zen Archery(Wis to Attack Rolls for Ranged attacks-the source was given to me some time ago, but I can't remember..) might ease the issue a little, but they have few ranged options.

Few Feats that help, few equipment options, and because of this, require VERY high stats to function...and as far as I know, there aren't even Prestige classes released to deal with the issues.

...It certainly feels that the Monk is an afterthought. And has always been so, and probably will always be so.

Talya
2007-05-25, 09:16 AM
1) Prioritizing wisdom means it's even harder for him to hit enemies, giving him the same AC with -1 penalty to hit.


No, no it isn't. No monk should take Weapon finesse when they can take Intuitive Attack. Both use a feat, but they are better off relying on wisdom than dexterity.


The monk'll be paying ALOT more for his AC boosts than I will. This isn't taking into consideration potions of cat's grace or owl's wisdom, but that's going to suck up his resources quickly.

Yes, it might cost them more...although if you have a monk in the party, the DM should make a habit of handing out bracers of armor. Unless they take Vow of Poverty, anyway.

Talya
2007-05-25, 09:18 AM
Zen Archery(Wis to Attack Rolls for Ranged attacks-the source was given to me some time ago, but I can't remember..) might ease the issue a little, but they have few ranged options.


Intuitive Attack does this for simple and natural weapons in melee, as well.

Telonius
2007-05-25, 09:18 AM
Now, suppose the fighter readies an action to attack you when you come in range. Or better yet, uses one of those fancy longbows instead of standing around waiting for you to hit him. What's your contingency for that?

One contingency is the Deflect Arrows feat, which Monks can get at level 2 as a bonus feat. But even with that, the Monk loses - because he only gets one hit in per turn, with no power attack; and the fighter can shoot at him four times per round with a composite longbow. Monk can only dodge out of the way of one of those.

But let's say the fighter doesn't use the bow. To avoid getting an AoO as he leaves a threatened square, the Monk has to tumble past/through; which reduces his movement to half for the duration of the tumble. So no, he doesn't get the full 90' of movement anyway, unless he wants to get AoO'd every time - and hit with the power attack that's up until the fighter gets his next turn. If he takes the AoO, fighter gets two hits per turn on him, as opposed to Monk's one, and Monk loses even faster. So, he has to tumble for at least one square, which costs him ten movement instead of five; down to 80' of movement other than that one square. So, he can move 40' "there and back" each round. 40', incidentally, is exactly the distance a fighter wearing full plate can charge each round. No boots of striding are needed.

In this situation, the Monk's best bet is to forget about damage dealing for a bit. Get out your trusty Quarterstaff - it's a Monk weapon for a reason - and try to disarm that fighter of his Greatsword. With your +4 to disarm from Improved Disarm (you did take that feat, right?), you have a chance. Not an optimal chance, but a chance. If you succeed, the weapon's on the ground. Snatch it up and Dimension Door away. Sunder it - woohoo for Adamantine fists - and Heal yourself. Then go beat the fighter to a bloody pulp. He'll probably get out a secondary weapon; this one will most likely be easier to disarm. This tactic won't work all the time - locked gauntlets, a basic equipment choice, can foil it. But how many fighters do you know who bother to get those? Anyway, I haven't done the math for it, but it's possible that it will, on average, work before the fighter kills you.

OOTS_Rules.
2007-05-25, 09:35 AM
You forgot Flurry of Blows. It sounds weak, but see a level 20 Flurry of Blows for reference. It gets 5 hits, making it better than a full attack, and those 5 hits get 15/15/15/10/5 bonuses for hit, just as good as its BAB. each of those strikes do 2d10 damage. On average, that does about 50 damage. Then, proceed to add strength bonus, which should be high by level 20. If played straight from level 1, Monks aren't to good, but in high level campaigns they are very powerful.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-25, 09:36 AM
Intuitive Attack does this for simple and natural weapons in melee, as well.

What book is this in?

Also, (and this is just my opinion) the DM shouldn't dole out extra items to a character just because of their class selection. Someone shouldn't get freebies just because they're a monk (and if they should, that doesn't help 'balance' arguments for the monk). Unless the DM is doing it evenly, in which case we're back at the starting line: i'll be getting more moneysworth of equiment because it's cheaper than the bracers.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 09:38 AM
I'd say the monk still needs to have full BAB and be able to flurry as a standard action to be fixed, mind you. It's also broken if the only way to make a monk effective is to take vow of poverty.

I posted a way to flurry at the end of a charge earlier in the thread. Page...5, I think.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-25, 09:41 AM
And monk build gets better and better, thanks for you hints, SpikeFightwicky! However, the 1.5 balor kill can no longer be challenged...


- You get a -20 penalty to your move silently penalty when running or charging. Monk with +6 wis bonus has a MS skill of +29 plus any miscellaneous bonus, +9 after the -20 penalty. Highest possibly role: 29. Highest possible listen check for the Balor: 39. I still don't see how he can sneak up on the balor. This also assumes that the Balor is in an open area with more than a 120 ft. radius with no hindering terrain.

The moment the monk charges it is his surprise round, so it does not matter if the balor sees him then (as in any ambush situation). He sneaks up to within 125-240 feet (outside the true seeing vision) and then charges in his surprise round since, well, he has the surprise.
The surrounding area (rough terrain or not) is an issue, yes. But if the monk has a flying spell effect up, he actually is even another 30 feet faster and can charge from 300ft (-30 to spot and listen, another -40 to spot from invisibility) flying from whereever.



- Damage from surprise hit (in the off chance you get a surprise round) is less than indicated. Str damage is X1.5 on a 2 hander, not doubled, and you're still not getting past his DR. STR damage bonus is +13, which makes damage equal to 38, and 34 on a regular hit.

Ah, got that double thing wrong. So it's 13 instead of 18. However, I also forgot to put in the holy damage, which is 7 on average. So the build hits 8 times with 2 more damage, so it's around 400 damage now (I also forgot the one more attack due to BAB 20 in the above build). The monk does not even need the surprise round anymore (only to get close to the balor, so a move even in a dungeon flying for 150ft is just fine to set up a 1-round kill).


You don't call this jumping through alot of hoops? This mostly tells me that you need cleric buffs and tons of magic items to deal less damage than a fighter would.

What you call "jumping through a lot of hoops" is simply a reflection of high-level play. By level 20, all (and I mean ALL) characters have so awesome powers, in part also from equipment that equal CR monsters have no chance against them in single combat anymore. Which is logic, since the CR equal to character level are caclulated for four-member-parties to deduct 20% of the resources (Hp, spells etc.). So, one party member should get through just fine (although not necessarily unscathed. The monk in the example does).

The monk needs the cleric buffs, the cleric need the monk's movement to deliver the tons of damage etc... It is a group game. It rewards the group chances of success if all work together.
Additionally, magic items are provided by the game to help balance the classes. If casters can do stuff that non-caster classes can (move fast, get high melee damage, find traps etc) with spells, so can the non-casters by using the many, many items out there that emulate spells. Using the items is an ability that every class has. (note that there are very, very few items out there that provide a few class abilities or feats. This is for a reason: so that caster classes cannot ontop of their spells use items to emulate class features of non-casters).


Take a fighter, STR 30 (16 base, +5 from levelling, +6 belt, +2 tome). With a +5 holy cold iron greatsword (+7 weapon), and core fighter feats, he has: +20 BaB + 10 Str + 5 enh + 3 luck +1 boots of speed +2 morale +1 competence + 2 GWF = +44... 3 points higher than your best attack with the monk, after being cleric-spell buffed. And the damage: 2d6 + 2d6 holy + 15 STR + 5 Enh + 4 GWS + 3 luck +2 morale +1 competence = 44 before any kind of power attack, 10 points higher than your monk, ALL of it going through DR, plus a crit on a 17-20. And the fighter has a ton of useful feats in the PHBII I could add to make these numbers much higher. Plus, he can use an animated shield to keep up a high AC. And all this before any spell buffs. If I were so inclined, I could use a ring of spell storing to teleport next to the balor from miles away and get a definate surprise round. This is just a generic fighter build with no bells and wistles, just equipment and feats. So yeah, I'm still doubting Monkzilla...

Er...just equipment and feats? How is that different from the monk? (simply replace the fighter's more feats with the monk AC boni and quivering palm). I don't understand your reasoning.
Btw, I am the first to welcome with open arms anyone who says that a fighter makes a great class in combat (and believe me, I already discussed quite a lot about that...)
The fighter is roundabout better in sheer offensive capabilities. The monk is better in defense. The monk has better skills. The fighter has more feats. So it balances out. What is so difficult to grasp here? If you like a more offensive character with a lot of feat tricks, take a fighter. If you like a defensive character with other tricks and some skills, take a monk. Flavourwise, modify them as you like (so you can be the fighter-kung fu type while being a roguish monk or whatever).


- It's a published WotC adventure, with a balanced mix of everything (not 'monster-heavy' as you assume). We fight NPCs often, and we fight monsters often. The rare time we fight a spell-caster, he's typically hard to get to, well defended, or not a wizard. WotC published an entire core book based around monsters, so don't get all weirded out when I mention that monster fights happen ever so often.

I still get weirded out (like that word). But it's OK. If your DM gets WoTC adventures or designs his own that have few spellusers in it, then he may not encourage/warn players wanting to play a monk that their specialty may not be that useful. It should all work out.



- As I've shown with my example, the 'super lvl 20 monk damage' is still less than a generic no thought put into it fighter. And those spells he uses are only round per and minute per level spells, so after an encounter, he's not super for the rest of the day.

Come on, how do you know you put less effort into that one? Btw, his STR is 29, not 30. Since you focused on STR, your AC is likely lower than that of the monk, as are your saves, plus you have no spell resistance. The money spent on animated shields and maximum armour enhancements is missing for enhancers to DEX (capped by armour anyhow for most fighters) and other AC enhancers of different kinds (natural AC, deflection boni etc). Note that by lvl 20, from his class abilities alone the monk gets +12 to touch AC (wis and AC bonus). Touch AC is a vital statistic in high-level play when going against some undead monsters or spellcasters.
And you used non-core material which could open further avenues to the monk as well. And I do not see big difference between the two, to be honest. The morale and luck bonus also means some buffs involved (at least the luck bonus by the cleric, and you need a ring or scroll as the monk to activate it since divine favor affects only the caster).



- The guards are still going to slaughter the monk while he engages the caster, and he won't deal significant damage to the caster before he drops.

Er...this is ridiculous. I have shown above the monk does close to 400 damage to a balor in 1.5 rounds; say 300+ damage in 1 round. Against a caster, it is even worse - provided the caster does not have some special defense up (contingency, project image), which would likely also affect the fighter in the same way. If it is a spell with a will save, the monk is far ahead of the fighter even.
As for the guards: the monk and the fighter have about the same AC at that level. The monk, however, has high movement and tumble as a class skill to move even THROUGH opponents squares without AoO to get out. The fighter does not.



- How should he have the highest AC in the game? He has 18 Dex, 16 Wis, and chugs a potion of mage armor when needed, for a whopping total of 21 AC, 22 with dodge. My cleric/fighter has full-plate, and a shield, for total of 22 AC all the time (after feats). The problem is that, due to MAD and being an elf, he only has 12 Con, whereas I have 18 (Dwarf). So I can survive alot better than he can. As for attacking, he has +7 (+5/+5 on a flurry) to hit and deals 1d8+2. I have +8 to hit and deal 1d10+3 (+6/+6 on an axe/shield bash). So he's as hard to hit as I am, can't take more than a few hits before he starts hurting, doesn't hit as often and deals less damage. He's great at what I perceive the monk's role to be: melee support/scouter, but he has too much of a glass jaw to be more than that right now. This is done with point buy (albeit too many points for my liking), so it's not a matter of 'rolling crappy stats'.

OK, read my post a bit more intensely. I said "among the highest ACs" in the game, not "the highest". Of course your full plate dwarf with a shield has a bit better AC (much more once the mage armour wears off). However, you also have
- 10ft less movement which is a disadvantage a combat. With every level, this is going to widen more and more vs the monk. Even now, if you want to retreat, you can't, because most opponents are faster than you are.
- horrific penalties to your movement skill checks.
- worse saves. If your DM never lets you do Reflex (monk even has evasion!) or Will saves, I guess that is a fairly...specific campaign.

Meanwhile, if the monk is an elf- great! He can use a composite longbow without penalty and with DEX 18 (!) and can be either the major archer or supporting archer in your group in combat until he sees an opportunity for a stunning fist attack to help the rogue or whatever. He does not even need to sheathe the bow for it for maximum flexibility.
What in my opinion your monk player does wrong is being the party tank/or in the frontline alongside you all the time. This is not a good idea.
He could use his 1st and 3rd level feats for point blank shot and rapid shot and he should be fine.

- Giacomo

lord_khaine
2007-05-25, 09:50 AM
first of all, im would like to remind people, that acording to the current FAQ a monk can her unarmed damage with a gauntlet, and thereby get a decent enchantet weapon without having to pay 3 times standart cost though a amulet of mighty fist.

that said, i will agree on that monk is a hard class to play, that requires very good stats, and some carefull planning.
(and i also find it a bit unfair the swordsage is allowed to use light armor and stil get wisdom bonus to ac)

anyway, the monk does have several strong points, that i would like to comment.

1. Stunning fist. for the cost of a signel bonus feat, you get a decent attack, that will let you set most classes with a weak fort save out of the combat for a round, and opens up for a followup flurry of blows, that might hit a bit better. if you then invest in ability focus(MM), and/or fist of the heavens(BOED) then you can raise the dc by up to 4, and potentialy even get a decent chance at affecting something with a good fort save.

2. Grappling. grappling is a very powerfull tool, especaly at low lvs, that lets you set mediumsized opponent out of the battle, or open them up for some sneak attack action from a rogue buddy, though it is best against 1/2 and 3/4 bab classes, then the improved grapple feat makes it usefull even against full BAB classes, where the +4 bonus combined with the option to make a flurry means sooner or later you will win that opposed roll.
in the end grappling is defeatet by freedom of movement, but in that case, either you get very rich on Rings of freedom of movement, or else just wait until a dispel magic hits your target.

3. Tripping. also a good option, as long as your opponent isnt flying, and has 2 legs. the penalty to ac and attacks from being prone opens up for some PA action from your friends, and it also serves as decent battlefield control, to keep melee people away from arcane casters or other soft targets.

4. Speed. this is also quite usefull, combined with tumble as a class skill, it both allows for getting to casters before they start to buff up, to get though ranks of weak minions and harash casters who might otherwise have considderet spending their firepower on other targets, or to return quickly after a (failed) scouting mission.
its also pretty usefull outside of combat, for getting away, stop people from doing the same, exploration and a lot of other things.

5. Saves. having 3 good saves is nice, there are a lot of nasty critters with a lot of nasty special attack, and often a failed save means either being out for the rest of the battle, or costing you 5k in diamonds.

6. Archery. not something you usualy considder a monk trait, but with a few feats or a fighter dip monks makes for some good archers. generaly monks need a good dex anyway, and if you combine manyshot with a monks high speed, then you get a archer who is very good at getting away from melee opponents, and has a great defence against most ranget attacks.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 09:54 AM
3. Tripping. also a good option, as long as your opponent isnt flying, and has 2 legs. the penalty to ac and attacks from being prone opens up for some PA action from your friends, and it also serves as decent battlefield control, to keep melee people away from arcane casters or other soft targets.

Be aware: flying opponents are still trippable. It's treated as a stall. See the "Minimum Forward Speed" in this link (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#movingInThreeDimensions).

Telonius
2007-05-25, 10:10 AM
You forgot Flurry of Blows. It sounds weak, but see a level 20 Flurry of Blows for reference. It gets 5 hits, making it better than a full attack, and those 5 hits get 15/15/15/10/5 bonuses for hit, just as good as its BAB. each of those strikes do 2d10 damage. On average, that does about 50 damage. Then, proceed to add strength bonus, which should be high by level 20. If played straight from level 1, Monks aren't to good, but in high level campaigns they are very powerful.

The problem is that more attacks doesn't necessarily mean more hits. If the monk is attacking something with AC (14-monk's strength bonus)* or below, you have a better than 50% chance that all of those flurry attacks will hit. Against something that has higher AC, the monk hits less often. And with sufficiently high AC, a monk with five light attacks hits less often than a fighter with four heavy attacks.

Consider a monster with AC 35, like a Very Old Black Dragon. The monk can only hit it on a natural 20 with any of his attacks. That's 1/20= 5% chance of hitting it with each roll. But a fighter can hit it in his first attack with a 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, or 20. 6/20 = a 30% chance of hitting it on the first attack. With the others, he can only hit it with a 20, so a 5% chance of hitting it with each successive attack.

* - or (14-wisdom bonus) if the monk has Intuitive Attack, or (14-dex bonus) if he has Weapon Finesse.

OOTS_Rules.
2007-05-25, 10:31 AM
The problem is that more attacks doesn't necessarily mean more hits. If the monk is attacking something with AC (14-monk's strength bonus)* or below, you have a better than 50% chance that all of those flurry attacks will hit. Against something that has higher AC, the monk hits less often. And with sufficiently high AC, a monk with five light attacks hits less often than a fighter with four heavy attacks.

Consider a monster with AC 35, like a Very Old Black Dragon. The monk can only hit it on a natural 20 with any of his attacks. That's 1/20= 5% chance of hitting it with each roll. But a fighter can hit it in his first attack with a 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, or 20. 6/20 = a 30% chance of hitting it on the first attack. With the others, he can only hit it with a 20, so a 5% chance of hitting it with each successive attack.

* - or (14-wisdom bonus) if the monk has Intuitive Attack, or (14-dex bonus) if he has Weapon Finesse.

But you are forgetting strength bonus. An epic-level Monk probably has a good strength bonus, and Weapon Finesse can be taken to obtain a good Dex bonus in place of strength, removing the Monk's need for strength on attacks, and that can be taken by a level 2 monk. Lets say a level 20 monk goes for Dex every other 4 levels, and Wis when he isn't taking Dex. Dex score becomes 21, with +5 bonus. Monk has Weapon Finesse, so he can use his Dex score instead of his Str. This gives him a +5 to his attack. This gives his first 3 flurries +20, needing only a 15 to hit. Then, he takes Overwhelming Assualt, giving another +4 bonus. The monk only has to roll an 11 for his first 3 strikes, a 16 for his fourth strike, and a 20 for his last. Add Fiery Fist to get another 1d6 damage, and flanking bonus for another +2. A 9, 9, 9, 14, and 19 seem pretty simple to me, except for the 19.

Indon
2007-05-25, 10:33 AM
Now, suppose the fighter readies an action to attack you when you come in range. Or better yet, uses one of those fancy longbows instead of standing around waiting for you to hit him. What's your contingency for that?

The Monk dashes up, sunders the weapon (If we assume level 20, the monk doesn't even care about the weapon's hardness so it's easily done for, and at lower levels the monk could afford to spend more time breaking the weapon), eats one full attack if the warrior has Quick Draw (otherwise, one attack), then withdraws and proceeds to kill the warrior with a crossbow. The monk could even Wholeness of Body the damage taken. Ditto for a barbarian, or a melee ranger, or any melee/ranged fighter who isn't a Scout, who a monk would have more difficulty outpacing, or a rogue with maxed UMD and a bunch of long-range wands (also sunderable, but a UMD rogue is going to have a bunch of wands so the rogue's going to get wise to the monk's strategy eventually).

Edit: And if the warrior or whatever doesn't pull out a ranged weapon, a monk kills him with a crossbow. Just bring a lot of bolts.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 10:36 AM
But you are forgetting strength bonus. An epic-level Monk probably has a good strength bonus, and Weapon Finesse can be taken to obtain a good Dex bonus in place of strength, removing the Monk's need for strength on attacks, and that can be taken by a level 2 monk. Lets say a level 20 monk goes for Dex every other 4 levels, and Wis when he isn't taking Dex. Dex score becomes 21, with +5 bonus. Monk has Weapon Finesse, so he can use his Dex score instead of his Str. This gives him a +5 to his attack. This gives his first 3 flurries +20, needing only a 15 to hit. Then, he takes Overwhelming Assualt, giving another +4 bonus. The monk only has to roll an 11 for his first 3 strikes, a 16 for his fourth strike, and a 20 for his last. Add Fiery Fist to get another 1d6 damage, and flanking bonus for another +2. A 9, 9, 9, 14, and 19 seem pretty simple to me, except for the 19.

The problem with the assumption here is that you seem to be assuming that the fighter (who is monostat dependent and doesn't need to worry about burning feats to equalize) doesn't have a strength bonus equal to or greater than the monk. He will. The monk has MAD, the fighter does not.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 10:37 AM
The Monk dashes up, sunders the weapon (If we assume level 20, the monk doesn't even care about the weapon's hardness so it's easily done for, and at lower levels the monk could afford to spend more time breaking the weapon), eats one full attack if the warrior has Quick Draw (otherwise, one attack), then withdraws and proceeds to kill the warrior with a crossbow. The monk could even Wholeness of Body the damage taken. Ditto for a barbarian, or a melee ranger, or any melee/ranged fighter who isn't a Scout, who a monk would have more difficulty outpacing, or a rogue with maxed UMD and a bunch of long-range wands (also sunderable, but a UMD rogue is going to have a bunch of wands so the rogue's going to get wise to the monk's strategy eventually).

Edit: And if the warrior or whatever doesn't pull out a ranged weapon, a monk kills him with a crossbow. Just bring a lot of bolts.

"Eating a full-attack", as you so nicely put it, is frequently lethal. Wholeness of Body caps at 40 hp, which is not very much. Sundering is a very poor tactic to rely on.

OOTS_Rules.
2007-05-25, 10:42 AM
He's talking about a dragon, Fax, not a Monk vs. Fighter battle.

Indon
2007-05-25, 10:46 AM
"Eating a full-attack", as you so nicely put it, is frequently lethal. Wholeness of Body caps at 40 hp, which is not very much. Sundering is a very poor tactic to rely on.

Monks have sufficiently high AC that a warrior can't power attack for much without ending up losing damage from misses, being able to make more than one attack in the first place in the scenario would require a feat investment, and longbows are easy to break, a wielder of a longbow can't take an AOO against someone trying to sunder (at least, I'm pretty sure that's how AOO's work with longbows). The only problem is with the opposed attack roll, and if the monk fails that, then the warrior can either spend a move action to put the weapon away keeping him from taking more than a single attack (and no attack without Quick Draw), or drop it, get one attack or maybe a full attack with Quick Draw, and then the monk eats an AOO (I dunno if tumble could be used in this specific circumstance, but if it could, not even that) to grab the bow and leaves with it.

To have a chance of surviving, the Fighter would have to have Quick Draw (otherwise he's no chance), and get lucky on the one round he would have to kill the monk. Or, alternately, he could own multiple longbows.

Edit: OOTS, no, I'm not talking about a dragon.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-25, 10:48 AM
The moment the monk charges it is his surprise round, so it does not matter if the balor sees him then (as in any ambush situation). He sneaks up to within 125-240 feet (outside the true seeing vision) and then charges in his surprise round since, well, he has the surprise.
The surrounding area (rough terrain or not) is an issue, yes. But if the monk has a flying spell effect up, he actually is even another 30 feet faster and can charge from 300ft (-30 to spot and listen, another -40 to spot from invisibility) flying from whereever.

- I guess at this point it all comes down to circumstance. Hard to argue that. There's a possible circumstance that the Balor surprises the monk.


What you call "jumping through a lot of hoops" is simply a reflection of high-level play. By level 20, all (and I mean ALL) characters have so awesome powers, in part also from equipment that equal CR monsters have no chance against them in single combat anymore. Which is logic, since the CR equal to character level are caclulated for four-member-parties to deduct 20% of the resources (Hp, spells etc.). So, one party member should get through just fine (although not necessarily unscathed. The monk in the example does).

The monk needs the cleric buffs, the cleric need the monk's movement to deliver the tons of damage etc... It is a group game. It rewards the group chances of success if all work together.
Additionally, magic items are provided by the game to help balance the classes. If casters can do stuff that non-caster classes can (move fast, get high melee damage, find traps etc) with spells, so can the non-casters by using the many, many items out there that emulate spells. Using the items is an ability that every class has. (note that there are very, very few items out there that provide a few class abilities or feats. This is for a reason: so that caster classes cannot ontop of their spells use items to emulate class features of non-casters).

- I haven't played much higher than level 12, so it's true, I'm not too familiar with high level wacky antics.


Er...just equipment and feats? How is that different from the monk? (simply replace the fighter's more feats with the monk AC boni and quivering palm). I don't understand your reasoning.
Btw, I am the first to welcome with open arms anyone who says that a fighter makes a great class in combat (and believe me, I already discussed quite a lot about that...)
The fighter is roundabout better in sheer offensive capabilities. The monk is better in defense. The monk has better skills. The fighter has more feats. So it balances out. What is so difficult to grasp here? If you like a more offensive character with a lot of feat tricks, take a fighter. If you like a defensive character with other tricks and some skills, take a monk. Flavourwise, modify them as you like (so you can be the fighter-kung fu type while being a roguish monk or whatever).

- My wording might have been off. What I mean, I put very little thought into the fighter, whereas the monk did alot of zany stuff to get his buffs (Rings of spell storing, UMD, stuff like that). The only thing I meant was that the monk build in the example thought outside box more than a fighter did to get similar results (whether this is bad or not is up to the player to decide. By all means, play an uber monk if you like, it's by no means bad). A fighter is alot more out in the open as to his progression. Whereas getting better items and feats to improve combat seem natural, getting UMD and spellcraft don't (I doubt that the 'average' player would think of putting ranks in those skills. As such, the uber monk requires more thought than the fighter - and that's neither good nor bad - it's just that not all players want to think that much). I'm also not saying that monks are crappy crap crap and I think that the highlighted section of the quote sums things up for the class roles almost perfectly.


I still get weirded out (like that word). But it's OK. If your DM gets WoTC adventures or designs his own that have few spellusers in it, then he may not encourage/warn players wanting to play a monk that their specialty may not be that useful. It should all work out.

- Well put.



Come on, how do you know you put less effort into that one? Btw, his STR is 29, not 30. Since you focused on STR, your AC is likely lower than that of the monk, as are your saves, plus you have no spell resistance. The money spent on animated shields and maximum armour enhancements is missing for enhancers to DEX (capped by armour anyhow for most fighters) and other AC enhancers of different kinds (natural AC, deflection boni etc). Note that by lvl 20, from his class abilities alone the monk gets +12 to touch AC (wis and AC bonus). Touch AC is a vital statistic in high-level play when going against some undead monsters or spellcasters.
And you used non-core material which could open further avenues to the monk as well. And I do not see big difference between the two, to be honest. The morale and luck bonus also means some buffs involved (at least the luck bonus by the cleric, and you need a ring or scroll as the monk to activate it since divine favor affects only the caster).

- What I mean by less effort is that I didn't even have to look up any spell effects, magic item effects, etc... I don't know cleric spells by memory like I do feats and magic items, so it took me less effort to come up with those stats. I could come up with similar stats for the monk, but I'd have to look up some spells and magic items. That's all I meant by less effort. I think one of the reasons why some look down on monks is that it's not as straight forward to get bonuses as the fighter (fighter relies on feats and equipment, monk relies on skills, spells, feats and equipment).

- Armor class won't be too low. +5 mith. Full plate, +5 shield, amulet of nat. armor +5, ring of prot +5 and +3 dex can bring it up 44 without counting luck or competence or other modifiers. That's by no means low and probably comparable to the monk's (I can't remember the monk's optimized AC). The Balor will hit with it's highest attack on a 12 or better (not good odds). His touch AC will be alot lower (26 or something using the same armor as above), but 26 is not a sure shot from a wizard. But of course, you don't play a fighter if you want a high touch AC (one of his foibles, and where the monk shines).

- There's also the matter of the next encounters happening later on in the day.



Er...this is ridiculous. I have shown above the monk does close to 400 damage to a balor in 1.5 rounds; say 300+ damage in 1 round. Against a caster, it is even worse - provided the caster does not have some special defense up (contingency, project image), which would likely also affect the fighter in the same way. If it is a spell with a will save, the monk is far ahead of the fighter even.

- My coments about the spell caster weren't taking level 20 into consideration. I'm not saying the fighter is a better mage killer, either. I'm just saying that a monk doesn't ALWAYS mean instant death of a spellcaster (or if so, it's not always so easy as 'run, grapple, done').



As for the guards: the monk and the fighter have about the same AC at that level. The monk, however, has high movement and tumble as a class skill to move even THROUGH opponents squares without AoO to get out. The fighter does not.

- That's fine, the fighter is likely engaging something more immediate, and letting others (like another spellcaster, or 'GASP' a monk) deal with the caster. I never said that fighters are better mage hunters than monks, so don't put words into my mouth. Also, while the monk is dealing with the mage, his guards won't drop their swords and let him, they'll be attacking him on their next action (my example assumes that a 'guard' will stay close-to/adjacent to the mage, not in the middle of the battle-field).





OK, read my post a bit more intensely. I said "among the highest ACs" in the game, not "the highest". Of course your full plate dwarf with a shield has a bit better AC (much more once the mage armour wears off). However, you also have
- 10ft less movement which is a disadvantage a combat. With every level, this is going to widen more and more vs the monk. Even now, if you want to retreat, you can't, because most opponents are faster than you are.
- horrific penalties to your movement skill checks.
- worse saves. If your DM never lets you do Reflex (monk even has evasion!) or Will saves, I guess that is a fairly...specific campaign.

- I'm aware that I can't retreat, and that's fine - dying in battle's a glorious death for my char. I also already know the limitations of my character. Will saves are actually decent. Why wouldn't my DM let me do reflex or will saves (I'm really not sure what you're going on about)? Sounds like you're making more assumptions here. The campaign isn't specific, it's a published adventure, WotC's standard of how an adventure should be. I'm not sure what this paragraph was meant to tell me.


Meanwhile, if the monk is an elf- great! He can use a composite longbow without penalty and with DEX 18 (!) and can be either the major archer or supporting archer in your group in combat until he sees an opportunity for a stunning fist attack to help the rogue or whatever. He does not even need to sheathe the bow for it for maximum flexibility.
What in my opinion your monk player does wrong is being the party tank/or in the frontline alongside you all the time. This is not a good idea.
He could use his 1st and 3rd level feats for point blank shot and rapid shot and he should be fine.

- He doesn't deal enough damage to be major archer (and we have a ranger). I agree that he shouldn't be fronline, but that's what he's doing (and I'm sure alot of other players see the monk and think the same thing - frontline combat). I can't remember what his feats were, but we have an archer already, and a bard with point blank and rapid shot, so we don't need him so much as ranged support (though it does help against flyers). Either way, I think (hope?) that he's learning more the role of his char., and it'll be up to him whether or not it's what he wants in a character.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 10:57 AM
Monks have sufficiently high AC that a warrior can't power attack for much without ending up losing damage from misses, being able to make more than one attack in the first place in the scenario would require a feat investment, and longbows are easy to break, a wielder of a longbow can't take an AOO against someone trying to sunder (at least, I'm pretty sure that's how AOO's work with longbows). The only problem is with the opposed attack roll, and if the monk fails that, then the warrior can either spend a move action to put the weapon away keeping him from taking more than a single attack (and no attack without Quick Draw), or drop it, get one attack or maybe a full attack with Quick Draw, and then the monk eats an AOO (I dunno if tumble could be used in this specific circumstance, but if it could, not even that) to grab the bow and leaves with it.

To have a chance of surviving, the Fighter would have to have Quick Draw (otherwise he's no chance), and get lucky on the one round he would have to kill the monk. Or, alternately, he could own multiple longbows.

Edit: OOTS, no, I'm not talking about a dragon.

Actually, no, monks do not typically have AC any higher than a fighter counterpart. Also, the "opposed attack roll" is not an easy pass, considering the fighter has higher BAB and a higher Strength bonus, probably by at least four points on both counts. So, you're relying on an attack method in which you're already subpar and therefore won't probably succeed.

Indon
2007-05-25, 11:02 AM
Actually, no, monks do not typically have AC any higher than a fighter counterpart. Also, the "opposed attack roll" is not an easy pass, considering the fighter has higher BAB and a higher Strength bonus, probably by at least four points on both counts. So, you're relying on an attack method in which you're already subpar and therefore won't probably succeed.

So what does the fighter do if the monk does fail? Continue attacking a meleeing monk with a ranged weapon, or cumbersomely swap weapons and let the monk withdraw without (or, with a feat, with nary) a scratch, or drop the weapon and let the monk grab it and run or smash it while unattended?

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 11:07 AM
So what does the fighter do if the monk does fail? Continue attacking a meleeing monk with a ranged weapon, or cumbersomely swap weapons and let the monk withdraw without (or, with a feat, with nary) a scratch, or drop the weapon and let the monk grab it and run or smash it while unattended?

None of the above. The fighter hangs onto the bow and puts his spiked gauntlets through the monk's face.

Telonius
2007-05-25, 11:07 AM
The problem with the assumption here is that you seem to be assuming that the fighter (who is monostat dependent and doesn't need to worry about burning feats to equalize) doesn't have a strength bonus equal to or greater than the monk. He will. The monk has MAD, the fighter does not.

Exactly. So let's say you have a Fighter who starts out with 16 STR. (It'll probably be 18, but let's be charitable). Put in all of your stat bumps to STR, to give you a 21 (+5). Get a +5 weapon. With two very simple choices - all core, all things nearly every fighter in existence does, without costing any feats - the fighter already has a better to-hit than the optimized monk who's flanking with somebody. This isn't even counting things like a Belt of Giant Strength, Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization, Powerful Charge ...

So, you say a Monk has some feats? So can the fighter, with extra feats left over because of the fighter bonus feats. (Minus one feat for having to take Unarmed Strike). And he'll still have higher BAB than the Monk, so he hits more reliably. No matter how you slice it, the Fighter is better at hitting high-AC enemies than the Monk is.

Bardbarian
2007-05-25, 11:08 AM
The moment the monk charges it is his surprise round, so it does not matter if the balor sees him then (as in any ambush situation). He sneaks up to within 125-240 feet (outside the true seeing vision) and then charges in his surprise round since, well, he has the surprise.

--->...and goes 120 feet, since it's a suprise round. No double move allowed on a charge in a suprise round, since you're only allowed a standard action. To charge in a suprise round, you must perform a partial charge. So either you're in True Seeing range to begin with to try to get the suprise charge in, or you charge from 240', and the Balor is next to act. Am I missing a RAW somewhere?

Aquillion
2007-05-25, 11:13 AM
As I suggested in edit in my post before (you may have missed it), get a ring, or better, get two rings of medium spell storing with rightous might, divine power (which benefits the monk more than all other fighting classes except the rogue) and divine favor (they cost a total of 100,000, affordable for a lvl 20 character).

The great thing is that thanks to UMD and his high WIS (not necessarily the case for other fighting classes), he can even afford the scrolls himself and cast the spells into the rings (but simply asking npc spellcasters for a lower fee than scrolls, or ask your party cleric to cast for free is much easier- he will gladly give them to the monk - and himself as well if clericzilla). As a last buff, throw in a potion of good hope (+2 morale bonus to hit and damage).
The spells take the monk to the same size category as the balor (he could even take the grappling route now, but let's leave it at the awesome damage output)
Buff up with those for true Monkzilla power :smallbiggrin:Sooo... in order for a monk to be effective in combat, he needs to abuse the most broken spells available to another class. Using almost all his wealth to do so. Which makes him effective for, generally, a single 7 round interval once per day (rings of spell turning cast at minimum possible CL), using effects with a low CL that are easily dispelled. And leaving him useless the rest of the time, since he spent all his money on that one big burst. And generally dependant on either your cleric spending multiple high-level spells to fill up your rings (spell slots they're going to miss on extended, multiple-consecutive-day adventures), or on pouring even more money into it on a regular basis.

If you're going to use Divine Power, why not just play a cleric? They don't get those two extra attacks, but they can cast other spells, too; they'll get full CL, making it last longer and be harder to dispel; and they don't have to spend 100,000 gold to do it. Plus they can get bonuses from normal weapons and armor, which (spread out over the attacks that they do get) are likely going to contribute a lot more than those two attacks.


The balor likely IS NOT flying around since the monk surprises him. The monk can wait for the opportunity. Not even a dragon flies around all the time.
The fighter is equalised in melee by the monk in this respect (surpassed if you count the superior mobility). The monk may not have the zilla spells in the ring all the time (although a party cleric or spare scrolls could mean the monk may do the trick several times in a day), and other fighting classes also could get the zilla spells in rings and UMD (it's quite a sound investment for many purposes), but this is by no means "jumping through ALOT of hoops".So, to go over your assumptions:

You're assuming that your Monk is able to follow their opponent and observe them in a quiet, safe environment, from around 240 feet away at all times. You're assuming that the Balor randomly lands in a position with 240 feet of straight, clear, totally unobstructed ground between him and the Monk (Where? Why would the Balor land in a totally empty field?) As others have pointed out, even with all these assumptions, sneaking up on the Balor and surprise-charging them is still not feasible, since the penalty for charging makes it impossible to take him totally by surprise.

So you don't get your surprise round... that means no flurry of blows. The Balor gets a turn no matter what you do. Hey, guess what? Not only do Balors fly, but they get Greater Dispel Magic at will. It's a shame you spent the bulk of your WBL on trivially-dispelled low-CL buffs, isn't it, and built your whole character around having those buffs up? Oh well. Maybe when you roll up a new character you can choose a better class.

And this doesn't just apply to Balors. A build that depends on always getting a surprise round and just hoping that your opponents never get to do anything is useless, end of story, especially if you rely on low-CL buffs and are trying to make a caster-killer... you have a glaring weak spot to a spell almost every caster of every stripe is going to have prepared, learned, whatever. Despite all the flashy things you tried to put into it, your build is like the Monk class itself--cool-looking on paper, but totally useless in practice.

OOTS_Rules.
2007-05-25, 11:13 AM
Actually, I was talking to Fax about what TELONIUS said.

Indon
2007-05-25, 11:21 AM
None of the above. The fighter hangs onto the bow and puts his spiked gauntlets through the monk's face.

A light weapon? Now the monk has a good chance to win through straight combat; the monk will deal comparable damage per-hit and will get more hits.

Edit: OOTS; my bad, sorry.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 11:31 AM
A light weapon? Now the monk has a good chance to win through straight combat; the monk will deal comparable damage per-hit and will get more hits.

Edit: OOTS; my bad, sorry.

Does he? The fighter has more HP, better average Con, a better attack bonus, and about equal damage per hit. Further, his gauntlets are enchantable and able to be made of special materials, unlike the monks' fists. So, while the monk has 2d10 + Str lawful adamantine fists, the fighter has 1d4 + 5 + 1d6 fire + 1d6 electrical + 1d6 cold + Str keen adamantine gauntlets. That's an average of 11 damage + Str for the monk, and an average of 18 + Str for the fighter...and the fighter will hit more often and have a better Strength bonus, and critical more often too.

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 11:34 AM
Actually, no, monks do not typically have AC any higher than a fighter counterpart. Also, the "opposed attack roll" is not an easy pass, considering the fighter has higher BAB and a higher Strength bonus, probably by at least four points on both counts. So, you're relying on an attack method in which you're already subpar and therefore won't probably succeed.And that monk is 8 points further behind on that opposed attack roll, because an unarmed strike is a light weapon and our fighter is wielding a two-handed weapon. Unless the fighter is using two weapons or a weapon and a shield, in which case he can simply full attack with that if the sunder succeeds. With 5 more BAB and the +8 difference from weapon sizes alone, the monk has...a 5.25% chance of succeeding on the opposed roll. Opposed rolls are funny like that; with a roll on each side the relative difference between modifiers becomes much more important.

To be fair I do suppose a monk could be using an adamantine or ki focus two-handed weapon of their own for the sunder purposes here....


But the whole thing also relies on the fighter not using an adamantine weapon (or +3 mithral weapon), which has enough hardness that the monk can't bypass it.


None of the above. The fighter hangs onto the bow and puts his spiked gauntlets through the monk's face.Here, I was thinking he'd probably five-foot-step back and full attack the monk with bow.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 11:36 AM
But the whole thing also relies on the fighter not using an adamantine weapon (or +3 mithral weapon), which has enough hardness that the monk can't bypass it.

Wouldn't Ki Strike (Adamantine) overcome that hardness, though?

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 11:37 AM
Wouldn't Ki Strike (Adamantine) overcome that hardness, though?No, ki strike adamantine lets you treat your unarmed strikes as adamantine for the purpose of bypassing hardness (and DR, of course). Adamantine only ignores hardness less then 20. Adamantine has hardness 20, and +3 mithral has hardness 21.

Indon
2007-05-25, 11:42 AM
Does he? The fighter has more HP, better average Con, a better attack bonus, and about equal damage per hit. Further, his gauntlets are enchantable and able to be made of special materials, unlike the monks' fists. So, while the monk has 2d10 + Str lawful adamantine fists, the fighter has 1d4 + 5 + 1d6 fire + 1d6 electrical + 1d6 cold + Str keen adamantine gauntlets. That's an average of 11 damage + Str for the monk, and an average of 18 + Str for the fighter...and the fighter will hit more often and have a better Strength bonus, and critical more often too.

If we're going to be talking about enchanted gauntlets, a monk can do the same. Yes, it takes a feat, but since that's the monk's primary weapon, he's likely to have much better enchantments than a fighters' secondary melee weapon, eh?

Though, I suspect with this fight we're starting to go too deep into optimization. I think we both agree a monk can be optimized to do awesome melee things easily on par with other meleers, and the objective of this specific sub-sub argument would be how a fight between a less-optimized monk would go against a less-optimized member of another melee class. Agreed?

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 11:55 AM
Yes. A monk can do terrific things with land-based mobility--and with the correct feats, be an excellent secondary combatant. I still maintain that the monk's problem is that he doesn't do very well at what he's advertised to: fight in the front line, kill casters, and be a king of mobility.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 11:58 AM
I have missed a few long posts, but, Giacomo--you have presented a level 20 character who can defeat a specific monster... provided he has level 20 wealth (which is quite significantly more than even the amount of gold you ought to have at level 17), provided the circumstances are ideal, provided he has several rounds to prepare, provided he has the surprise round.

That is simply unimpressive. What character could not manage that? A wizard would not even have to try. A fighter could make it next to the balor and cut it apart on the surprise round. A cleric could use a Holy Word spell. Even a (mediocre) ranger with a surprise round and initiative could likely deliver enough ranged damage without any optimization... particularily if he has rings of spell storing and 3000-gp oils as well.

So far it seems like your hypothetical monk can spend thousands on consumable items he will use perhaps as often as daily (the salve--Improved Grab is common among monsters--and the Oil of Greater Magic Fang), and, most importantly, whose success does not rely on essentially any of his class abilities. Anyone can hide beyond a Balor's range. Anyone can cross-class Use Magic Device. Anyone can purchase consumables, both expensive and daily-use, and kill a monster (that is supposed to drain 20% of his resources in a fair fight) during a surprise round and a full round under ideal circumstances. Your monk does not fight with his fists often, his most important skill is not a class skill, he moves quickly--something that can be achieved for all intents and purposes by Haste. I am surprised you did not include the assumption that the monk will be Polymorphed or Polymorph Any Objected into a more viable combat form than his natural one.

So, with that said: what does our hypothetical monk look like at first level? At third? At sixth? At eleventh? At sixteenth? At twentieth, if you'd like, although twentieth is less important than the rest in my opinion.
And what happens when he does not have several preparatory rounds to activate all of his temporary boosts and then have a surprise round? If the party has burst into the headquarters of the evil cult/warlord/housecat, or a dragon has swooped down on them, or brigands ambush them, or any other such situation?

Indon
2007-05-25, 12:08 PM
Yes. A monk can do terrific things with land-based mobility--and with the correct feats, be an excellent secondary combatant. I still maintain that the monk's problem is that he doesn't do very well at what he's advertised to: fight in the front line, kill casters, and be a king of mobility.

Well, we know a monk can do good front-line fighting with a bit of tweaking. And while a monk can't kill an optimized wizard, I think the billions of threads on this topic have demonstrated that almost nothing can actually do that (and sorceror by extention), so that's moot. Rather, consider a monk's ability to fight a Druid or Cleric. Both have fewer and poorer-quality battlefield control spells than a wizard/sorceror, monks have good saves vs. save-or-lose abilities and a high touch attack AC (so good luck on that Slay Living), and a buffed monk wipes the floor in straight combat with even the most Zillaest CoDzilla, because while yes, that Druid can turn into a huge bear, a Monk can be turned into a huge bear _that moves faster and attacks better_.

And as for mobility, all the monk needs is something that can grant it _any_ Fly/Swim/Climb speed, and the monk suddenly rocks hard at whatever that variety of movement is. A monk with Slippers of Spider Climb, for instance, can outrun _vertically_ almost any monster with a climb speed, a monk with Winged Boots can outrace a Wizard using Fly (Yes, there are faster ways for a Wizard to fly, I know), and, well, you get the idea. From there, the only thing a monk would need for ridiculously superior mobility is a teleportation move, which the monk does get a little bit of.

lord_khaine
2007-05-25, 12:11 PM
actualy he looks better at the lower lvs, where there are generaly more medium sized humanoid opponents, and where spellcasters isnt quite so overpowered as they are at lv 20.
i belive he would look best at the middel lvs, 9-13, where he starts to gain a few of his trademark skills, and can get a good gauntlet to use improve the hit rate of his flurry.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 12:14 PM
Indon, are you in all seriousness comparing the monk to a cleric or a druid in combat?

If he is fighting against them, a single dispel robs him of his spell-stored whatever it is he is using, and he is left as, well, a monk, against some of the best melee characters around (who can, incidentally, buff themselves far better than the monk).

Indon
2007-05-25, 12:41 PM
Indon, are you in all seriousness comparing the monk to a cleric or a druid in combat?

If he is fighting against them, a single dispel robs him of his spell-stored whatever it is he is using, and he is left as, well, a monk, against some of the best melee characters around (who can, incidentally, buff themselves far better than the monk).

You have a good point. A monk trying to be magically combat-buffed should stack tons of negligable magical combat buffs so that Dispel takes them instead.

Edit: Though, come to think of it, that still leaves a spell targeted at his best buff. You'd have to make a custom magic item to prevent dispelling of that, instead supressing the spell for a couple rounds which the monk survives through because, well, staying alive's what the monk does.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 12:53 PM
Ah, Indon?

Targeted Dispel Magics affect every single spell on their target.
Honestly, comparing a character to a cleric because "well, they can buff from items!" is disingenuous at best. Against monsters, you can not and will not be able to throw up Righteous Might from a ring in most of the encounters; the cleric will be casting it every fight.

Indon
2007-05-25, 01:07 PM
Ah, Indon?

Targeted Dispel Magics affect every single spell on their target.
Honestly, comparing a character to a cleric because "well, they can buff from items!" is disingenuous at best. Against monsters, you can not and will not be able to throw up Righteous Might from a ring in most of the encounters; the cleric will be casting it every fight.

An item of Polymorph 5/day makes the Monk the best meleer in a group five times a day... unless, of course, he is dispelled in which case it would be one less time that day.

The point is not "Monks can buff from items!" but "When monks are buffed, be it from items or from other party members, they get more out of it than anyone else can." A monk given the ability to fly, climb, or swim does it better than anyone else given that ability. An enlarged monk gains more power in melee than anyone else. A monk polymorphed into a dragon has a better full attack than not only a True Dragon, but any other player character would.

JaronK
2007-05-25, 01:20 PM
An item of Polymorph 5/day makes the Monk the best meleer in a group five times a day... unless, of course, he is dispelled in which case it would be one less time that day.

The point is not "Monks can buff from items!" but "When monks are buffed, be it from items or from other party members, they get more out of it than anyone else can." A monk given the ability to fly, climb, or swim does it better than anyone else given that ability. An enlarged monk gains more power in melee than anyone else. A monk polymorphed into a dragon has a better full attack than not only a True Dragon, but any other player character would.


Except for the rogue, who can put sneak attacks on the natural attacks from Polymorph. Or the Swordsage, who can do pretty much everything the monk can do, except better. Or the Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker, who can do orders of magnitude more damage. Or the machine gun tripper fighter, who does tripping better than the monk, and probably charges a lot better too.

So no. The monk really doesn't do what you think it does.

JaronK

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 01:24 PM
An item of Polymorph 5/day makes the Monk the best meleer in a group five times a day... unless, of course, he is dispelled in which case it would be one less time that day.

The point is not "Monks can buff from items!" but "When monks are buffed, be it from items or from other party members, they get more out of it than anyone else can." A monk given the ability to fly, climb, or swim does it better than anyone else given that ability. An enlarged monk gains more power in melee than anyone else. A monk polymorphed into a dragon has a better full attack than not only a True Dragon, but any other player character would.

Are you really sure of that? Myself, I would far rather set the durable, combat-feat-possessing Fighter with a humanoid-shaped (if not Humanoid-typed) Polymorph or the Rogue with a many-natural-attack polymorph than a monk. A monk given the ability to fly flies faster, but he still can not do as much when he gets there--and, honestly, the difference between 180-foot aerial charges and, say, 260-foot aerial charges is not particularily noteworthy in the same way the difference between having aerial charges and not having them is.

Of course, I do not use polymorph, because it should never have been printed, but that is a separate issue.

Indon
2007-05-25, 01:31 PM
Except for the rogue, who can put sneak attacks on the natural attacks from Polymorph.
Which don't scale with size like the monk's attacks do, though a invisible rogue hydra is pretty impressive. Hydra's about the endgame for polymorph options for a rogue, though.


Or the Swordsage, who can do pretty much everything the monk can do, except better.
Except for base unarmed damage, which the monk can do better at. If only there were some way to buff base unarmed damage.

Alternately, strikes aren't complimented by, say, natural attacks like a rogue's sneak attack or a monk's flurry is, because they're single actions.

And do Swordsages get an enhancement bonus to speed? If not, then no, a monk that can fly would fly better than a swordsage. Or really be superior in every aspect of mobility short of teleporting, as I'm sure there's some kind of teleportation maneuver.


Or the Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker, who can do orders of magnitude more damage.
Without buffs. That doesn't actually have anything to do with my point. You cast Greater Mighty Wallop on one of those, and a monk, and the monk gets much, much more out of it.


Or the machine gun tripper fighter, who does tripping better than the monk, and probably charges a lot better too.

Again, nothing to do with the point I was making.

Fenix_of_Doom
2007-05-25, 01:32 PM
What I see here is a lot of throwing with numbers and items and skills, could someone like, Fourth Tempter said, provide me with a monk build from level 1 to level 20 that is effective at almost all levels and can do some of the insane things at lvl 20 mentiont here without spending a lot of gold each day?
Somehow I think that would be much more convincing then dropping a whole lot of items/skills/feats out of nowhere. Use some point buy that is reasonable.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 01:37 PM
Which don't scale with size like the monk's attacks do, though a invisible rogue hydra is pretty impressive. Hydra's about the endgame for polymorph options for a rogue, though.
Untrue. Wyvern is an even better one than Hydra, by-and-large, except for the ability to attack with all the heads as a standard action. There are also dragons, creatures with Extraordinary racial sneak attack, and so on.

All of this is irrelevant, of course, because there is no Polymorph spell.


Except for base unarmed damage, which the monk can do better at. If only there were some way to buff base unarmed damage.
The Unarmed Strike adaptation of the Swordsage receives the monk's base unarmed damage... which is not particularily impressive. 2d10 is not significantly better than 2d6, especially when you are receiving all sorts of bonuses for the 2d6 that the 2d10 is not.
In any case, why does it matter if the Swordsage can do unarmed damage? He does not need to, he can use weapons competently.


Alternately, strikes aren't complimented by, say, natural attacks like a rogue's sneak attack or a monk's flurry is, because they're single actions.
And then you have all the things Two-Weapon Fighting swordsages use: Burning, Searing, and Inferno Blade boosts, Dancing and Raging Mongoose boosts, Pouncing Charge, Girallon Windmill Flesh Rip, Time Stands Still, all of those delightful things that get more out of more attacks than the monk does.


And do Swordsages get an enhancement bonus to speed? If not, then no, a monk that can fly would fly better than a swordsage. Or really be superior in every aspect of mobility short of teleporting, as I'm sure there's some kind of teleportation maneuver.
There are highly useful teleportation maneuvers--second, fifth, and eighth level, allowing you to teleport around as a standard, move, and swift action respectively.
There are also maneuvers allowing you to attack more than once as a standard action, maneuvers giving you extra attacks (whether you are taking a single or full attack), a maneuver to full attack on a charge, and so on. All of these allow you to make your mobility more useful than the monk's.


Without buffs. That doesn't actually have anything to do with my point. You cast Greater Mighty Wallop on one of those, and a monk, and the monk gets much, much more out of it.
I think you misunderstand--the Frenzied Berserker can use a bludgeoning weapon, and it would benefit him every bit as much.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 01:42 PM
You know, looking at this thread I really have to wonder about a few things.

I'm sure different people have different playstyles, but it seems to me a bit odd to determine whether a monk (or any class for that matter) is effective by pitting him against an enemy of another class who is specifically optimized to kill him. That's not a very accurate representation of the typical game situation.

For one thing, assuming we're talking about a typical pary of 4-6 characters, a monk (or anyone for that matter) should rarely, if ever, find themselves taking on an enemy fighter, wizard, druid, balor, etc. alone.

For another thing, generally when one faces enemies, it is either a single or pair of enemies individually more powerful than the characters (a la the entire OoTS vas Xykon) or against a large number of weaker opponents (either all at once or several at a time over a few fights) and often, it's the second scenario with the first as a climax.

What kind of encounters are there wherein the opponent isolates/neutralizes the monk (or any character for that matter) and then is able to slaughter the rest of the party while the monk does nothing(as a few posters have postulated)? If anything that is an argument that the monk is overpowered; if the monk was weaker than other characters of similar level, the enemy would have neutralized only his weakest opponent leaving him with 3 of greater power.

Another issue here is the scenario under which the monk (or any other melee character) fights a wizard or flying monster. Why are we assuming that the fight starts outdoors or in an area where the wizard/monster can make use of flight? Does no one ever go into a dungeon, wizards tower, or the like any more? I'm sure someone will say "well, the monk can't count on that being the case" but then the Wizard can't count on fighting outdoors and being able to start the fight outside of melee range. Furthermore, wizards are known to like fighting in their lairs due to magical traps, guardians, etc that they can prepare which might more than offset the limitation of making flight impossible.

This brings me to the next point: planning. Why are the two characters fighting in the first place? If the wizard is the PC and he wants to kill the monk NPC, he should plan on attacking the monk outdoors; if the PC is the monk and he wants to kill the enemy wizard or (insert flying/hard to get at creature here) he should attack it in a confined space or lure it into one. This is just basic smart play; if your DM is constantly forcing you to fight enemies who counter your every plan or who always have the advantage of terrain, either your DM is not rewarding intelligent play, or you're simply dismissing the idea of tactics and relying on builds and mechanics to win. (If thats what you enjoy, that's fine, but I would think it would be monotonous if every battle were simply a matter of seeing whether you or the DM could outsmart each other in terms of assembling the combatants' abilities)

The monk, with the flurry of blows, should be good when fighting a number of weaker opponents who will have a lower armor class; if you're dealing with a large number of enemies against who an attack with a BAB of 10 is sufficient to hit regularly, a 15 should almost guarantee a hit and 20 becomes superfluous. The same applies to damage; if you're fighting a horde of enemies that you can 1-shot with your quarterstaff +5 of frost, it does the fighter no good to have the extra damage from a greatsword +5 of frost; the extra d6 of damage he does is superfluous unless we're really concerned about how far into the negatives each enemy gets. If you're constantly fighting enemies where the fighter can hit them and you can't, your DM is screwing you (and presumably any other melee fighter in the party since his attacks at his lower BAB shouldn't hit consistently either) by constantly selecting opponents that you can't hit but the fighter/ranger/paladin/barbarian can.

This also speaks to the difference between unarmed damage and armed. Use unarmed against opponents who are easy to hit; usually they have less hit points as well resulting in faster kills. Have weapons with enchantments on them to do damage against opponents with higher ACs; preferably with something like shock or shocking burst etc. to make up for the lower damage of the weapon itself.

Now, some people will say "but the full BAB types will still do more damge so they're still better!" Yes, they're better at dealing damage agianst higher AC targets. However, the monk should be a unattractive target to a powerful enemy: high saves, reasonably good AC, and reasonable hitpoints (compared to the whole party, not just other melees) and not doing a whole lot of damage. The monk should be able to stand there do his damage mostly unmolested unless the DM just has it out for him. Over the course of several rounds, that damage should add up. Essentially, he's doing the same thing as a rogue, adding extra damage, but he's doing it in a way that should be less likely to draw the sudden ire of an opponent, especially when there are attractive targets like spellcasters or rogues.

So, while I would agree that the monk would be weak for pvp (and I wouldn't play one in an evil campaign where that would be a real possibility) the mok in a party should be filling the role of a scout, slow but steady damage dealer, and occasional special situation handler. The DM should occasionally put in situations that play to the monk's abilities.

I would suggest that if the monk, or for that matter any class, is seen as not contributing enough to the party, something is wrong in terms of either how the game is being run, or in terms of how the party is approaching challanges. If the situation favors your enemy, don't fight him in that situation.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 02:10 PM
You know, looking at this thread I really have to wonder about a few things.

I'm sure different people have different playstyles, but it seems to me a bit odd to determine whether a monk (or any class for that matter) is effective by pitting him against an enemy of another class who is specifically optimized to kill him. That's not a very accurate representation of the typical game situation.

For one thing, assuming we're talking about a typical pary of 4-6 characters, a monk (or anyone for that matter) should rarely, if ever, find themselves taking on an enemy fighter, wizard, druid, balor, etc. alone.

For another thing, generally when one faces enemies, it is either a single or pair of enemies individually more powerful than the characters (a la the entire OoTS vas Xykon) or against a large number of weaker opponents (either all at once or several at a time over a few fights) and often, it's the second scenario with the first as a climax.
Those are good points. It is simply easier to minimize variables if one disregards the party.


What kind of encounters are there wherein the opponent isolates/neutralizes the monk (or any character for that matter) and then is able to slaughter the rest of the party while the monk does nothing(as a few posters have postulated)? If anything that is an argument that the monk is overpowered; if the monk was weaker than other characters of similar level, the enemy would have neutralized only his weakest opponent leaving him with 3 of greater power.
The enemy would not normally neutralize the monk or be able to slaughter the rest of the party. On the contrary--the enemy would engage the rest of the party, and be slaughtered by them, while the monk contributes nearly nothing.


Another issue here is the scenario under which the monk (or any other melee character) fights a wizard or flying monster. Why are we assuming that the fight starts outdoors or in an area where the wizard/monster can make use of flight? Does no one ever go into a dungeon, wizards tower, or the like any more? I'm sure someone will say "well, the monk can't count on that being the case" but then the Wizard can't count on fighting outdoors and being able to start the fight outside of melee range. Furthermore, wizards are known to like fighting in their lairs due to magical traps, guardians, etc that they can prepare which might more than offset the limitation of making flight impossible.
Even enclosed locations can be large enough for flight to make an enormous difference (a fifty-foot-high cavern, say). Also, I suspect that a lot of people dislike dungeons; I know I do. However, at high levels, a space that truly encloses a character is difficult to find: Balors teleport at will, and can simply go outdoors, or hop from dungeon room to dungeon room, summoning allies, "sniping" with Spell-Like Abilities, and otherwise taking advantage of their mobility. Spellcasters, indoors, have a different advantage--battlefield control is far more effective indoors: a simple Wall of Stone or Force or Prismatic colors can cut a room in two... except for a thin slit through which spells can be cast but a person can not fit. Additionally, high-level parties can shape the enviroment almost at a whim: between stone-shaping spells, cheap-at-high-level Wands of Shatter ("that explodes. That, also. Oh, and that. That door? Kaboom. And while we're at it, I may as well get the table. Whee!"), and the simple fact that a high-level warrior with an Adamantine weapon and Power Attack can carve through stone walls in a manner akin to a sharp knife going through... well, not butter, but tough bread, the environment is highly mutable.


This brings me to the next point: planning. Why are the two characters fighting in the first place? If the wizard is the PC and he wants to kill the monk NPC, he should plan on attacking the monk outdoors; if the PC is the monk and he wants to kill the enemy wizard or (insert flying/hard to get at creature here) he should attack it in a confined space or lure it into one. This is just basic smart play; if your DM is constantly forcing you to fight enemies who counter your every plan or who always have the advantage of terrain, either your DM is not rewarding intelligent play, or you're simply dismissing the idea of tactics and relying on builds and mechanics to win. (If thats what you enjoy, that's fine, but I would think it would be monotonous if every battle were simply a matter of seeing whether you or the DM could outsmart each other in terms of assembling the combatants' abilities)
Presumably they are fighitng because the characters burst in on the wizard, or a dragon was flying by and saw the Heroic PCs, Slayers of his Kin, or because the Balor was rolled on the random encounter table (and is very surprised to be underwater let me tell you, not that that will stop him from attempting to disembowel the shining heroes and use their guts for garters!) or so on.

In general, PCs have the advantage of planning but not of terrain (because player characters are proactive, sallying forth and tallying ho), but the planning only occasionally allows for multiple rounds of self-enhancement before combat is joined.


The monk, with the flurry of blows, should be good when fighting a number of weaker opponents who will have a lower armor class; if you're dealing with a large number of enemies against who an attack with a BAB of 10 is sufficient to hit regularly, a 15 should almost guarantee a hit and 20 becomes superfluous. The same applies to damage; if you're fighting a horde of enemies that you can 1-shot with your quarterstaff +5 of frost, it does the fighter no good to have the extra damage from a greatsword +5 of frost; the extra d6 of damage he does is superfluous unless we're really concerned about how far into the negatives each enemy gets. If you're constantly fighting enemies where the fighter can hit them and you can't, your DM is screwing you (and presumably any other melee fighter in the party since his attacks at his lower BAB shouldn't hit consistently either) by constantly selecting opponents that you can't hit but the fighter/ranger/paladin/barbarian can.
I think you have overlooked the fact that the monk is unlikely to drop creatures in one hit (unless they are so weak as to not be a threat, or at a very low level), so his multiple attacks do not help him so very much. Additionally, "large number of weak opponents" is the least relevant scenario simply because it is so unthreatening--taking an extra two or three rounds to kill them all may mean an extra charge of a Wand of Cure Light Wounds or two, nothing more. This is the same reason that Great Cleave is a poor feat in most campaigns.


Now, some people will say "but the full BAB types will still do more damge so they're still better!" Yes, they're better at dealing damage agianst higher AC targets. However, the monk should be a unattractive target to a powerful enemy: high saves, reasonably good AC, and reasonable hitpoints (compared to the whole party, not just other melees) and not doing a whole lot of damage. The monk should be able to stand there do his damage mostly unmolested unless the DM just has it out for him. Over the course of several rounds, that damage should add up. Essentially, he's doing the same thing as a rogue, adding extra damage, but he's doing it in a way that should be less likely to draw the sudden ire of an opponent, especially when there are attractive targets like spellcasters or rogues.
Precisely. The monk is an unattractive target--he is not doing a whole lot of damage. He is not very good at tripping or disarming, either, compared to the true melee characters (and disarming is rarely useful except in campaigns full of humanoid weapon-wielding enemies). He may occasionally stun the enemy for a round, which is useful when it happens, but it is far from consistent. What you describe matches my experience with monks--the monsters by and large ignore them, because they can afford to. That does not speak highly of the class. A rogue may draw ire, but he ought to be prepared for that--and a full attack or two from a rogue may well cut a combat's duration in half! If the rogue is afraid of entering melee with a powerful opponent that could break him like a heart, he has Use Magic Device (as a class skill, and with the skill points to easily afford it) to fall back on. Additionally, the rogue is the most skillful character in the game, and the only core class with Trapfinding: the rogue is consistently and highly useful, regardless of the fact that he is weaker in melee than a warrior or cleric or spellcaster. The monk is not.


So, while I would agree that the monk would be weak for pvp (and I wouldn't play one in an evil campaign where that would be a real possibility) the mok in a party should be filling the role of a scout, slow but steady damage dealer, and occasional special situation handler. The DM should occasionally put in situations that play to the monk's abilities.
The rogue and flying, invisible wizard are already scouts, "slow but steady" damage is negligible (the monk does little damage), and there are no special situations the monk handles unless one really, really needs someone to jump over something and grappling hooks with ropes attached, flight spells, and everything else in the party's repetoire will not do the trick. The things you describe are not roles: at best, they are subsets of other roles, already covered far better than the monk can fill them.


I would suggest that if the monk, or for that matter any class, is seen as not contributing enough to the party, something is wrong in terms of either how the game is being run, or in terms of how the party is approaching challanges. If the situation favors your enemy, don't fight him in that situation.
But the situation does not favor the enemy--the rest of the party is doing marvellously. What should they do to allow the monk to contribute? What should the person running the game do? The only thing a monk excels at is Not Dying, Provided They Do Not Stand And Exchange Full Attacks. That is not something that is particularily exciting or easy to cater to.

Talya
2007-05-25, 02:16 PM
What book is this in?


Book of Exalted Deeds.

Monks need that book, even without Vow of Poverty.

I would change Intuitive Attack to also move the damage bonus from strength to wisdom, reducing MAD a lot more.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 02:18 PM
Vow of Poverty is actually terrible for the monk, save for games where the party is not receiving anything nearly approaching the suggested amount of wealth.

Intuitive Attack is, however, superior to Weapon Finesse. Still--a mosquito-bite is a mosquito-bite, and the monk's attacks are just that if he does not raise Strength (at which point he does not need to rely on another ability score for attack rolls).

Edit: altering Intuitive Attack that way would have far-reaching consequences. For example, Druids.

Counterspin
2007-05-25, 02:23 PM
I have to strongly disagree with Diamondeye. This is not a question of playstyle of preference. Of course those things come into play, but we are dealing with questions to which there are answers, and some of the classes are more powerful than some of the others. Monks are bad because

1. Their AC costs 4 times as much as anyone who can wear armor, generally speaking. (+1 armor bonus 1k, +2 Wis or Dex bonus 4k)
2. They are dependant on too many abilities
3. Their class abilities are contradictory(Fast movement and flurry)
4. By RAW they are lacking a good way to avoid DR, which gets more and more common as the game progresses
5. They are class which hits things in combat but lacks either full BAB or some sort of compensatory effect (such as sneak attack)

Suggesting that it is the DMs fault that Monks are bad is incorrect. Again, there are answers to these questions, and the monk is simply bad. WOTC shares this belief, I believe, because they have printed a substitute class, the Swordsage.

Indon
2007-05-25, 02:23 PM
Edit: altering Intuitive Attack that way would have far-reaching consequences. For example, Druids.

Druids can already Wild Shape into forms with as much or more strength than they would have wisdom, though, so its' most significant impact would be to boost Druidic combat when not wild shaped.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 02:28 PM
Druids can already Wild Shape into forms with as much or more strength than they would have wisdom, though, so its' most significant impact would be to boost Druidic combat when not wild shaped.

While that is true, high strength would cease to be a requirement for druid Wild Shape forms. This would open many previously less-optimal forms up and raise them sky-high--for example, creatures with many natural attacks often have a lower strength to compensate.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 02:39 PM
Precisely. The monk is an unattractive target--he is not doing a whole lot of damage.


"slow but steady" damage is negligible


But the situation does not favor the enemy--the rest of the party is doing marvellously. What should they do to allow the monk to contribute? What should the person running the game do? The only thing a monk excels at is Not Dying, Provided They Do Not Stand And Exchange Full Attacks. That is not something that is particularily exciting or easy to cater to.

This is the problem with thinking there is a problem with the monk.

Slow but steady damage is NOT negligable, precisely because it is steady. The monk is not standing and exchanging full attacks; they're standing there delivering full attacks next to the fighter or paladin or barbarian who is the one doing the exchanging.

If the monk cannot hit the target consistently with that full attack, the rogue should not be able to either.

As for what the rest of the party should be doing to help the monk, the same things they do to help other melee classes. As for what the GM should do, he should avoid regularly having the party face monsters where the extra +5 BAB means that fighters can expect to regularly hit but other classes cannot. If he is, he's relying too much on high armor class as an element of challenge.

Indon
2007-05-25, 02:43 PM
While that is true, high strength would cease to be a requirement for druid Wild Shape forms. This would open many previously less-optimal forms up and raise them sky-high--for example, creatures with many natural attacks often have a lower strength to compensate.

Like what, short of epic feats that allow Druids to transform into magical beasts and such? I'm pretty sure most animals and plants with lots of natural attacks have good strength.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 03:02 PM
Like what, short of epic feats that allow Druids to transform into magical beasts and such? I'm pretty sure most animals and plants with lots of natural attacks have good strength.

The infamous Fleshraker dinosaur from the Monster Manual 3 is a shining example of a powerful creature that would become significantly more powerful.

In the first Monster Manual, the Cheetah is a form competitive with, say, the Black Bear and Crocodile when you get it: it has Pounce and three attacks, but a lower strength. With Wisdom to attack and damage, it would be head and shoulders over the rest (20 Wisdom rather than the cheetah form's 16 strength, and full wisdom to damage on each attack rather than half strength).
The Dire Lion, competitive with the Dire Bear because of Rake and Pounce but a lower strength, would similarily benefit.
The low-hit-die Deinonychus dinosaur has five attacks and Pounce, which, if strength was irrelevant, would make it better than the Dire Lion and Dire Bear both (!).

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 03:08 PM
This is the problem with thinking there is a problem with the monk.

Slow but steady damage is NOT negligable, precisely because it is steady. The monk is not standing and exchanging full attacks; they're standing there delivering full attacks next to the fighter or paladin or barbarian who is the one doing the exchanging.
And what stops the monster from ripping into the obviously unarmored fleshling, rather than the metal-covered one?
The monk may be delivering full attacks, but they will not be doing a significant amount of damage--especially compared to the fighter or, worse yet, the barbarian!


If the monk cannot hit the target consistently with that full attack, the rogue should not be able to either.
The rogue produces a wand. The monk... well, I am unsure, really. Perhaps he whistles a jaunty tune as he runs in circles. That aside, the rogue's single attack is far more devastating than the monk's just as his full attack is.


As for what the rest of the party should be doing to help the monk, the same things they do to help other melee classes. As for what the GM should do, he should avoid regularly having the party face monsters where the extra +5 BAB means that fighters can expect to regularly hit but other classes cannot. If he is, he's relying too much on high armor class as an element of challenge.
Monsters with lower armor class will mean the warriors Power Attack and do ten more damage a strike. The monk will still pale in comparison. The monk may hit, but the only way he will be able to contribute in melee is if the real melee characters stop doing so.
High armor class is an element of challenge. What you are suggesting is removing otherwise-appropriate elements of challenge for the monk... because otherwise, he can not keep up.
And that is exactly what the problem with the monk is.

Ramza00
2007-05-25, 03:10 PM
Like what, short of epic feats that allow Druids to transform into magical beasts and such? I'm pretty sure most animals and plants with lots of natural attacks have good strength.

There is a feat in frostburn that allows a Druid to transform into magical beast with the cold subtype. A 12 headed hydra has the cold subtype, avaliable at lvl 15 Druid (need huge wildshape), or lvl 11 (for the 11 headed version) with MOMF. Since wildshape lasts all day at this point, you can cut off your heads and double them and heal (which you get fast healing with Extraordinary Wildshape Spell or MOMF 7), thus 24 natural attacks which you can use a single standard action to attack with (you can also use all the heads in a charge without pounce).

If you don't take the feat you can get shapechange at lvl 17. with a rod of extend and beads of karma and ioun stone you can easily make it last 18*2*10=6 Hours per day at lvl 17.

You can't use Dungeonbread with Wildshape right, or any other templates correct. If you can you just reduce the number of levels substantually to lvl 8 druid.

Indon
2007-05-25, 03:10 PM
In the first Monster Manual, the Cheetah is a form competitive with, say, the Black Bear and Crocodile when you get it: it has Pounce and three attacks, but a lower strength. With Wisdom to attack and damage, it would be head and shoulders over the rest (20 Wisdom rather than the cheetah form's 16 strength, and full wisdom to damage on each attack rather than half strength).


Relevant portion boldened.

Fair enough on your creature selection, but why would a feat that subs another stat for Str in terms of damage change how that damage is calculated?

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 03:17 PM
With the proper wording, it would not, I suppose--but then it would make even less sense than the feat already does. Swinging many times does not allow you to swing as hard as swinging once, but that does not apply to insight. All other such feats allow you to either add your [Ability Score] bonus to attack and damage, or use your [Ability Score] bonus for attack rolls and damage instead of Strength, and the half-Strength-on-offhand-attacks rule is a rule about Strength specifically.

And if you wrote it to act just as Strength does, then clerics would weep for joy and promptly use their weapons in two hands while keeping a mediocre strength, raising Wisdom sky-high. Melee clerics do not need to be better.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-25, 03:22 PM
Relevant portion boldened.

Fair enough on your creature selection, but why would a feat that subs another stat for Str in terms of damage change how that damage is calculated?

Because you're getting full off one stat, instead of the half typical of another, and it's a stat that is typically boosted out the wazoo for Druids.

selfcritical
2007-05-25, 03:54 PM
Simply put, Lack Of Magic Items. As in: they have none. At all. At least going by the SRD. There's nothing specifically for them. Which takes you into the land of Custom Magic Items.

Someone earlier mentioned in passing that in things like Neverwinter Nights, monks were better to use.

Standard D&D Monks would KILL for the stuff given as storeboughts in something like Neverwinter Nights.

Zen Archery(Wis to Attack Rolls for Ranged attacks-the source was given to me some time ago, but I can't remember..) might ease the issue a little, but they have few ranged options.

Few Feats that help, few equipment options, and because of this, require VERY high stats to function...and as far as I know, there aren't even Prestige classes released to deal with the issues.

...It certainly feels that the Monk is an afterthought. And has always been so, and probably will always be so.

Zen Archery should really be a class feature.

JaronK
2007-05-25, 03:55 PM
Except for base unarmed damage, which the monk can do better at. If only there were some way to buff base unarmed damage.

Actually, the unarmed varient swordsage does progress unarmed damage like a monk. Swordsages really do everything monks can do, only better. The only exception is flurry, which they more than make up for with stances and maneuvers. Raging Mongose, for example, gives them four extra attacks per round at their highest attack bonus when two weapon fighting, and Dancing Mongoose, a lesser version, gives two extra attacks. They can use those two boosts back to back while in a powerful stance and blow the monk away.


Alternately, strikes aren't complimented by, say, natural attacks like a rogue's sneak attack or a monk's flurry is, because they're single actions.

See boosts and stances, above. Tiger Claw style is all about boosts and stances, though it also has great two weapon manuevers, such as the ability to full attack on a charge... something monks would kill to have.


And do Swordsages get an enhancement bonus to speed? If not, then no, a monk that can fly would fly better than a swordsage. Or really be superior in every aspect of mobility short of teleporting, as I'm sure there's some kind of teleportation maneuver.

Swordsages get manuevers that let them jump as a swift action. And the fact that a monk flies super fast only matters in a wide open space against flying opponents... a situation that comes up rarely. Yes, monk speed is the one thing monks do well. Too bad it so rarely comes up.

JaronK

tarbrush
2007-05-25, 04:08 PM
The gap widens a bit more with Complete Champion out. The one ability that could've saved monks (pounce) suddenly becomes readily available, and whoops, they're one of two classes can't get it cos their alignment clashes with barbarian.

ZeroNumerous
2007-05-25, 04:43 PM
The only exception is flurry, which they more than make up for with stances and maneuvers.

Snap Kick. Getting flurry without taking a dip in horrific, burning Monk-ooze.

And tarbrush: Just because you have that alignment now doesn't mean you always had that particular alignment. Just take your first level as Barbarian and then go from there.

Oh look at that. You got an actually useful class ability. It's like Christmas for the Monk, except it just makes you pity him instead of feel happy. Honestly, people need to move on from Monk and embrace Swordsage.

Swordsage: Goes down smooth.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 05:17 PM
And what stops the monster from ripping into the obviously unarmored fleshling, rather than the metal-covered one?
The monk may be delivering full attacks, but they will not be doing a significant amount of damage--especially compared to the fighter or, worse yet, the barbarian!

Who is controlling the monster? The DM, right? That's whats stopping the monster from ripping into the monk... the fact that the one in armor is a greater threat.

Your entire premise is that the monk does not contribute appreciably to the group; why, pray tell, is the DM having a monster attack the least threatening opponent?


The rogue produces a wand. The monk... well, I am unsure, really. Perhaps he whistles a jaunty tune as he runs in circles. That aside, the rogue's single attack is far more devastating than the monk's just as his full attack is.

No, it is not. If we're assuming that this fight is against some horrendous melee monster that will shred the monk in short order, it will shred a rogue even faster, and it will attempt to do so after the rogue's first sneak attack. An unintelligent monster will react to great pain from a great injury while an intelligent monster will recognize the threat the rogue poses. Once the monster is facing the rogue, the rogue is no longer flanking, and by the way, if your opponent happens to have improved uncanny dodge, that rather neutralizes the rogue's sneak attack, while it has no especially adverse effect on the monk.

The monk will continue to do damage over the course of the fight while the rogue will be dead, or at least fighting on full defense. Assuming that for either character there is a fighter/paladin/barbarian that is the main tank, the monk will be able to keep attacking (with the same flanking bonus to hit the rogue would have had) over several rounds, thereby making up the damage the rogue did in one round.

If the rogue is off screwing around with his wand, not only is he taking the risk of a backfire, but he's not doing his main thing in combat which is sneak attacking. He's been turned into a crappy spellcaster, and what good is his wand is it happens to be of something the enemy is resistant to or can make themself resistant to?

The monk is also proficient with the crossbow, and since everyone has +5 weapons in these scenarios, there's no reason he couldn't have a +5 crossbow and Rapid Reload.


Monsters with lower armor class will mean the warriors Power Attack and do ten more damage a strike.

Oh really? So if the monk can hit just fine with a BAB of 15 that means the warrior can hit just fine with his at 10? Or with his second attack at 5? or his 3rd at 0? or his 4th at -5?

The monk will have at least 3 attacks, and as many as 6 at a BAB of 15, while the fighter, if he drops his BAB to 10 to get +10 damage, will get NONE at that BAB.

Furthermore, the monk should be the flanker if these two are fighting the same monster, so that would offset the -2 penalty for 2 weapon fighting. If he's not, he's giving the fighter that flanking benefi to power attack with... teamwork.


The monk will still pale in comparison. The monk may hit, but the only way he will be able to contribute in melee is if the real melee characters stop doing so.

It's irrelevant what the other melee characters are doing. The monk is still contributing. He does not "pale in comparison" at all if the DM is not having the enemy engage in illogical tactics that serve no purpose other than to neutralize the monk for the sake of neutralizing the monk.


High armor class is an element of challenge. What you are suggesting is removing otherwise-appropriate elements of challenge for the monk... because otherwise, he can not keep up.
And that is exactly what the problem with the monk is.

Not at all. That's a strawman. What I said was, if the party is consistently fighting monsters whose AC is in such a zone that melee characters with a +20 BAB can hit it consistently but those with a +15 is not, then the DM is using AC as a challenge element to the exclusion of other things.

High AC is an element of challenge, but it is not absolutely necessary in every major fight. If it is present, the DM is, at best, not being very creative.

Tellah
2007-05-25, 05:29 PM
Oh really? So if the monk can hit just fine with a BAB of 15 that means the warrior can hit just fine with his at 10? Or with his second attack at 5? or his 3rd at 0? or his 4th at -5?

The monk will have at least 3 attacks, and as many as 6 at a BAB of 15, while the fighter, if he drops his BAB to 10 to get +10 damage, will get NONE at that BAB.


No, it means that when the Monk is attacking at his +15 BAB, the Fighter can drop 5 points of BAB to get 10 points (or with many builds, 15 points) of consistent extra damage with the same likelihood of connecting with his target. Couple this with the difficulty of enchanting the attacks of a non-Kensai Monk, and a Fighter begins to outstrip the Monk in the damage department.

Talya
2007-05-25, 05:44 PM
Vow of Poverty is actually terrible for the monk, save for games where the party is not receiving anything nearly approaching the suggested amount of wealth.

The only reason for this is flight. If your monk can already fly, Vow of Poverty is superior to equipment. With Vow of Poverty, a monk can easily end up with 36-38 wisdom at level 20, as well as bonuses of +6-11, +4-9, and +2-7 to 3 other abilities of their choice. This is without mentioning that it gives all the bonuses they'd normally want (and not be able to get due to needing more equipment slots) from gear...+5 enhancement bonus to unarmed strikes, +10 armor, energy resistance (all) 15/-, +3 resistance bonus to all saving throws, no need to breathe, mind shielding, natural armor +3, deflection +3, DR 10/evil, Freedom of movement, regeneration, trueseeing (constant), and from exalted feats, +2d6 holy damage per hit.


Edit: altering Intuitive Attack that way would have far-reaching consequences. For example, Druids.

It would have negative consequences for druids. Good odds whatever form they choose would do better basing damage on strength than on wisdom...

Clerics are a bigger problem, I suppose (assuming they want to use a simple weapon.)

Vair
2007-05-25, 05:54 PM
--->...and goes 120 feet, since it's a suprise round. No double move allowed on a charge in a suprise round, since you're only allowed a standard action. To charge in a suprise round, you must perform a partial charge. So either you're in True Seeing range to begin with to try to get the suprise charge in, or you charge from 240', and the Balor is next to act. Am I missing a RAW somewhere?

Yes, haste and monk's movement speed are both enhancement bonuses. They don't stack, so he moves 90 feet. :smallbiggrin:

Raum
2007-05-25, 06:00 PM
Who is controlling the monster? The DM, right? That's whats stopping the monster from ripping into the monk... the fact that the one in armor is a greater threat.

Your entire premise is that the monk does not contribute appreciably to the group; why, pray tell, is the DM having a monster attack the least threatening opponent?Whether armor denotes a greater threat or not is debatable and immaterial. A good DM will try to act in character for the monster. If it's an unintelligent predator hungry for food, it will probably attack the victim seeming closest to it's normal food. For most animal types that will be someone unarmored. Once the fight is in progress it should depend on the animal's instincts...a wolverine might continue attacking it's first victim while a boar attacks the nearest or most recent distraction and a bull attacks whomever hurt it most. All depend on what they can sense of course.


No, it is not. If we're assuming that this fight is against some horrendous melee monster that will shred the monk in short order, it will shred a rogue even faster, and it will attempt to do so after the rogue's first sneak attack. An unintelligent monster will react to great pain from a great injury while an intelligent monster will recognize the threat the rogue poses. Once the monster is facing the rogue, the rogue is no longer flanking, and by the way, if your opponent happens to have improved uncanny dodge, that rather neutralizes the rogue's sneak attack, while it has no especially adverse effect on the monk.Hmm, a misconception of the rules here...there is no "facing" in 3.x. As long as the victim is between the rogue and an ally of the rogue, both rogue and ally get a flanking bonus.


The monk will continue to do damage over the course of the fight while the rogue will be dead, or at least fighting on full defense. Assuming that for either character there is a fighter/paladin/barbarian that is the main tank, the monk will be able to keep attacking (with the same flanking bonus to hit the rogue would have had) over several rounds, thereby making up the damage the rogue did in one round.Longer fights mean more damage taken by party members. So while monks do have defensive abilities to help them stay alive (movement to run if nothing else), how are they helping party members?


Oh really? So if the monk can hit just fine with a BAB of 15 that means the warrior can hit just fine with his at 10? Or with his second attack at 5? or his 3rd at 0? or his 4th at -5?I suspect he meant the fighter would use 5 BAB to Power Attack with, gaining 10 damage because of his two handed weapon. So the fighter will hit just as often as the monk (more if you account for higher strength) and do far more damage with each hit.


The monk will have at least 3 attacks, and as many as 6 at a BAB of 15, while the fighter, if he drops his BAB to 10 to get +10 damage, will get NONE at that BAB.Either I don't understand what you're saying, or there's another misconception here. A character with 11 BAB gets three attacks when using a single weapon to full attack. Even if their BAB is modified downward. He could put 10 in Power Attack and still have 3 attacks at 1 / -4 / -9. Quite possibly effective if using it to cut through a door or other low AC object.


Furthermore, the monk should be the flanker if these two are fighting the same monster, so that would offset the -2 penalty for 2 weapon fighting. If he's not, he's giving the fighter that flanking benefi to power attack with... teamwork.Remember, there's no facing. Both may get the bonus...or better yet, the rogue and monk.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 06:01 PM
No, it means that when the Monk is attacking at his +15 BAB, the Fighter can drop 5 points of BAB to get 10 points (or with many builds, 15 points) of consistent extra damage with the same likelihood of connecting with his target. Couple this with the difficulty of enchanting the attacks of a non-Kensai Monk, and a Fighter begins to outstrip the Monk in the damage department.

No, he doesn't. The fighter is only getting ONE attack at that 15 BAB while the monk is getting THREE at least.

If we assume "hitting consistently" at that BAB is hitting 2 times out of 3, that means the monk is hitting 2 times per round (at least, this is before ANY offhand attacks) while the fighter is hitting once per round two rounds out of three.

It is not difficult to enchant the attacks of a monk either; if we're going by the wealth/level tables a monk should have something like, say, +5 flaming keen kamas vs the fighters +5 flaming keen greatsword.

If an attack with a 15 BAB hits 2 times out of 3, after 3 rounds the monk should have scored 6 hits with his main hand while the fighter should have scored 2 with his 2 handed sword.

Assuming the monk has only a 12 strength and the fighter has a 20 strength, the monk will have done a total of 6d6 (6hits) + 30 (+5 enchantment) + 6d6 (fire damage) + 6 (strength bonus) or an average of 78 points of damage over that 3 rounds

The fighter with his greatsword and power attack will be doing 4d6 (2 hits) +10 (strength) +10 (magic) +20 (power attack) +2d6 (flaming burst) for a total average of 61 points of damage over that same period of time.

I'm sure someone will claim that the fighter should still hit more often due to higher strength, but the monk can have weapon finesse and a 20 dexterity just as easily as the fighter can have a 20 strength.

The greatsword also has twice the crit range of the kama, but with 6 attacks, the monk will have a 60% chance (6 rolls high enough to hit x crit range of 2 for keen weapons = 12 chances for a crit) to crit while the fighter will have a 40% chance (2 rolls high enough to crit x keen range of 4 = 8 chances)

This isn't even accounting for the fact that the monk, if he has half a brain and the opportunity is present, should be trying to flank the monster.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 06:17 PM
Whether armor denotes a greater threat or not is debatable and immaterial. A good DM will try to act in character for the monster. If it's an unintelligent predator hungry for food, it will probably attack the victim seeming closest to it's normal food. For most animal types that will be someone unarmored. Once the fight is in progress it should depend on the animal's instincts...a wolverine might continue attacking it's first victim while a boar attacks the nearest or most recent distraction and a bull attacks whomever hurt it most. All depend on what they can sense of course.

And "in character" for most monsters is to deal with the greatest threat or greatest source of pain first. Furthermore, why is the monk standing right next to the fighter where he's just as readily available for a snack? He's got hide and superior movement; he should be trying to move around the enemy to cause flanking.


Hmm, a misconception of the rules here...there is not "facing" in 3.x. As long as the victim is between the rogue and an ally of the rogue, both rogue and ally get a flanking bonus.

My bad. However, that means that the monk and the fighter can cause the enemy to be flanked just as the rogue can.


Longer fights mean more damage taken by party members. So while monks do have defensive abilities to help them stay alive (movement to run if nothing else), how are they helping party members?

He's doing damage. That ends the fight sooner. By that logic, the fighter isn't helping the party either.


I suspect he meant the fighter would use 5 BAB to Power Attack with, gaining 10 damage because of his two handed weapon. So the fighter will hit just as often as the monk (more if you account for higher strength) and do far more damage with each hit.

He won't. He'll hit one third as often because he gets one attack while the monk gets three at the highest BAB.. and that's without the monk's offhand weapon.


Either I don't understand what you're saying, or there's another misconception here. A character with 11 BAB gets three attacks when using a single weapon to full attack. Even if their BAB is modified downward. He could put 10 in Power Attack and still have 3 attacks at 1 / -4 / -9. Quite possibly effective if using it to cut through a door or other low AC object.

Wow, he can do more damage against doors? that's great!

The monk can attack at +15/+15/+15/+10/+5 with his MAIN HAND while the fighter is attacking at +15/+10/+5/0. The fighter's second attack has a low chance to hit, which isn't true until the fourth monk attack, and the last 2 attacks for the fighter are basically a writeoff, while only the last one for the monk is... and AGAIN that doesn't count the off hand.


Remember, there's no facing. Both may get the bonus...or better yet, the rogue and monk.

That would be ideal.

Tellah
2007-05-25, 06:22 PM
No, he doesn't. The fighter is only getting ONE attack at that 15 BAB while the monk is getting THREE at least.

You can power attack with a full attack.

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 06:30 PM
Furthermore, why is the monk standing right next to the fighter where he's just as readily available for a snack? He's got hide and superior movement; he should be trying to move around the enemy to cause flanking.
He won't. He'll hit one third as often because he gets one attack while the monk gets three at the highest BAB.. and that's without the monk's offhand weapon.

Which one are you doing? Using a monk's superior movement, or using a monk's flurry?

Indon
2007-05-25, 06:33 PM
Snap Kick. Getting flurry without taking a dip in horrific, burning Monk-ooze.


Snap Kick is the melee version of Rapid Shot (One extra attack, all attacks at -2), and is not nearly as good as Flurry. Of course, it shouldn't be, since, it's just one feat.

Edit:


Which one are you doing? Using a monk's superior movement, or using a monk's flurry?

Spending a feat (two by Fax's method, but no multiclassing required) to get Pounce capability gives him both.

Edit again:


You can power attack with a full attack.

His point is, the fighter attacks at 20/15/10/5. The monk attacks at 15/15/15/10/5. A fighter who takes 5 off of his BAB now attacks at 15/10/5/0, getting only one attack at the same attack bonus of the monk.

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 06:41 PM
Spending a feat (two by Fax's method, but no multiclassing required) to get Pounce capability gives him both.Not particularly...you still end your turn right there, next to the monster.

greenknight
2007-05-25, 06:51 PM
You once said you saw a passage in the DMG that said you receive XP for an encounter even if you have not defeated your opponent (because he escaped and comes back with a vengeance). I have searched and have not found it. If it were not the case, then the caster pays a lot of XP and will still not have defeated the monk.

That's not quite correct. The passage I think you're referring to is in the 3.5e DMG, p36-37. The important part is this:

You must decide when a challenge has been overcome. Usually, this is simple to do. Did the PCs defeat the enemy in battle? Then they met the challenge and earned experience points.

Essentially, a character has to defeat a foe to earn experience. If that foe cuts and runs, then the foe is defeated. It's important to realise that defeat does not always equal kill. But there's nothing there about getting XP if you don't defeat your foe, and nor should there be.


the gate calls a creature, willing or UNWILLING. Since calling puts the extraplanar at the risk to actually perish (as opposed to summoning) you can expect that most of the horrors from outer space you called (likely double your hit dice up to 40/50) will not be amused and seek vengeance. It is an npc and thus in the hands of the DM. The spell does not say anything on this, it only strongly hints the possiblity of hostility.

I don't see even a hint of hostility there. Assuming it's not an immediate task, then you would try for some kind of agreement called a contractual service in the spell description. Assuming the Gated creature accepts the bargain, this implies the creature is now willing to serve. And provided you live up to your part of the bargain, there's nothing in the spell description which indicates that it would become hostile to you. For an immediate task, the spell description states that you need not offer any reward or make any agreements, and the creature will simply depart at the end of the spell. And once again, there's no mention of the creature becoming hostile to the caster. And lets face it, a powerful 34HD+ creature isn't going to face that much risk of death, or even serious injury, against a foe which is considered to be a fair encounter vs a 20th level party. Its a bit like using a modern main battle tank to take out a sniper in an exposed position. Sure it's overkill, but the point is that the sniper probably won't be much of a threat to the tank.

Indon
2007-05-25, 07:02 PM
Not particularly...you still end your turn right there, next to the monster.

Oh, you're referring to withdrawing from combat? Anyone can do that, full round action, move up to twice your movement away from an enemy without provoking an AOO. Monks just do it competently because they can get out of charge range.

Edit: But you're right that without doing something less-than-effective like Spring Attack (which is still more viable for a monk than for another meleer), the monk picks either being an effective combatant, or being able to escape danger pretty much completely. But pretty much all combat-oriented characters do that.

Jasdoif
2007-05-25, 07:10 PM
Oh, you're referring to withdrawing from combat? Anyone can do that, full round action, move up to twice your movement away from an enemy without provoking an AOO. Monks just do it competently because they can get out of charge range.I was referring to being stuck there, next to your opponent, until your next turn. If your opponent survives the pounce, it might think that focusing on your adjacent unarmored form is a good idea. Not exactly the best use of that superior mobility if it lands you in harm's way like that.

And sadly for all classes, withdraw isn't much help if your opponent has reach. Only makes the square you start in considered not threatened; if you cross another threatened square you provoke an AoO as normal. Spring Attack could do it though, and for this a monk has a definite advantage for mobility.

Diamondeye
2007-05-25, 07:21 PM
Which one are you doing? Using a monk's superior movement, or using a monk's flurry?

FIRST you are going to move around to the back of the monster to cause flanking THEN you are going to full attack.

Same thing a rogue does. It's equally silly for a monk or a rogue to stand right next to a fighter.

Indon
2007-05-25, 07:24 PM
I was referring to being stuck there, next to your opponent, until your next turn. If your opponent survives the pounce, it might think that focusing on your adjacent unarmored form is a good idea. Not exactly the best use of that superior mobility if it lands you in harm's way like that.

True, but you're still as well-off or better than the Rogue is.



And sadly for all classes, withdraw isn't much help if your opponent has reach. Only makes the square you start in considered not threatened; if you cross another threatened square you provoke an AoO as normal. Spring Attack could do it though, and for this a monk has a definite advantage for mobility.

Hmm. Spring attack is useful for something after all! :smallwink: Alternately, the monk can tumble farther than other classes, and it's on his skill list. I'll keep this in mind if I'm ever a monk and I need to back off from something big, though.

JaronK
2007-05-25, 07:26 PM
Once you're comparing what's supposed to be a melee class to a rogue for combat potencial, having lost to the fighter, you know you're in trouble. Neither one of those are particularly good in melee. And yet both can offer at least as much as a monk.

JaronK

TGWG
2007-05-25, 11:05 PM
Ok, I've been watching this bourd for a while and I need to point out a few things on both sides of the arguement that I feel people have forgotten, in order to keep this bourd from repeating the same things over again. I don't stand on either side. I just like to keep things interesting.

point 1: Jump is a completly ineffective counter to a flying opponent. a pre-epic jump (without legendary leaper) requires a 20 ft running start before the jump, if the a character jumps without the 20 ft running start the DC for the jump distance is doubled so even though a monk has great mobility it's still comes up too short. (even so, the monk is beter suited for these jumps than any other core class but it just isn't enough)

Point 2: why does everyone assume that the monk is going to end up with 2d10 at lev 20? I know that if I was a monk, my lev 6 feat would be improved natural attack (remember a monks unarmed attack counts for both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon). That makes the monks final unarmed attack 4d8! Now please correct me if I'm wrong, but 4d8 damage + full strength bonus per hit for a medium sized character is alot of damage, not the best but still alot. The monk can also augument this with improved critical when he can. (even though a fighter weilding an enchanted weapon and improved critical still outshines the monk)

point 3: I'm surprised by the fact that no one has made this arguement yet, but I'll do it for the sake of exploring all possibilities. "a monk can chose to do nolethal damage with it's unarmed attacks without incurring the -4 penalty to attack." this is a poor replacement for the monks's 3/4 BAB. In a quest where you have to bring someone in alive a fighter or barbarian of the same level can take that -4 penalty and still have a higher chance to hit than the monk. (although of course the monk can do it's damage in a grapple which could prove useful)

point 4: a monk is the most effective class to use stunning fist. The monk has 1 use per monk lev while other classes have 1 use per FOUR levs, and the stun DC is (10+ (1/2)character level + WISDOM modifier ). No other melee class is likely to max out wisdom, (except if you count the cleric or druid but why would they chose stunning fist as a feat?) so the DC the enemy has to roll will be more difficult to overcome. (except if the monk doesn't, for some reason, fucos on wisdom in which case the increasd difficulty is negliegible)

Ok. now I want to delve into something a little more homeruled and imaginitive. A small sized ranger riding a medium to large sized monk. THINK ABOUT IT! Provided that the ranger doesn't get overweight the monk's land speed by lev 20 will far outshine any warhorse, and let's face it. 5 attacks of 2d10/4d8/6d8 should not even be compared to the Warhorses three attacks of two 1d6, and one 1d4. Also, i feel that if a monk manages a reflex save against an area effecting spell then the ranger on top of him should avoid the damage as well, provided that he make a ride check with a DC of 35 to prevent from falling off. (this absurd suggestion is not something that should be taken seriosly. Debate about it if you like but in the end I'll be the one who's laughing)

Alleine
2007-05-26, 01:07 AM
This began annoying me more and more as I read, so I just had to say something. It doesn't sound like anyone is taking into account wonderous items or weapons with enhancements.

I'm currently playing a monk, and planning out to make it as powerful as possible with what I have. I'll just describe what I plan. I apologize for any disjointedness.

Someone mentioned Monks AC isn't very good, I'll admit the class bonus that ends up as +3 isnt, but I maintained the highest AC out of my party at 41 for an 18th lvl human monk. I got good ability rolls for that, I must admit.

In the end, I'll end up with a githzerai monk 9/tattooed monk 9. To make up for the lack monk levels, I'll choose the crab, phoenix, lion, bat, and one other undetermined tattoo. This gives me DR 10/mag, 15+lvl spell resistance, 5 smites for a bonus +4 each, and +5 dex for 9 rounds 5 times a day. Thats at 18th lvl. Saving throws will be the same as a lvl 20 monk. Trade flurry of blows for decisive strike, because flurry will be useless at 9th. Tattooed levels stack for unarmed dmg, AC bonus, and movement.

2 Ward Cestus, one for each hand, able to be adamantine because of the metal woven into it. Give it all the weapon bonuses you want, especially after getting the versatile unarmed strike feat. You won't need any other weapons, unless you want ranged. Amulet of Mighty blows +5 to make up for some lost BAB, monks belt to up BAB even more, and I know there is a feat that will make it even higher.

As I mentioned before, versatile unarmed strike, weapon finesse to take advantage of the high dex, and seeing as I don't have the book containing the imrpoved natural weapons feat, I can't say anything about that, thought it sounds good. That isn't even all the feats, there are undoubtedly more that I don't know of, or haven't remembered that will also help.

Monks also make excellent scouts once they gain their movement bonus, able to dodge most traps and detect a lot of things others couldn't with their bigger skill point gain per level stuck into move silent, listen, spot, to speak nothing of the other skills they have.

Periapt of Wis +6, no gloves of dex, but from what I've heard you can still get their effect for the same price imbued into another item that is similar to gloves. Boots of striding and springing to get an extra +10 movement.

Now, I'm kind of new to D&D, so I don't know a whole lot, and the char I'm making is definitley not finished, but its looking pretty good to me. Doubtless those of you who are seasoned veterans could improve it more.

My take on the monk as an opportunistic fighter is that a monk can potentially run to the other side of an enemy while a fighter takes the front. If the enemy turns to the monk, boom! Fighter just got flanking thanks to the monk, and the enemy probably won't get in any good hits on the monk. The monk is a support character, not meant to be a front line fighter.

And also, slow fall I consider to be better than featherfall. You fall at a relativley quick speed, and can get away from things faster this way, or help an ally who just fell down a hole where no one else can get to fo whatever reason. In a recent dungeon one of my friends made, I was able to take a person we had to save, flee and exploding tower, and be safely out of the way by the time it blew, in fact I was the first one out of the tower.

It came to my mind that D&D is subject to change by its players, reading through the DM's guide and PHB2 it sounds like most of the stuff provided is simply something to start off with, that you can customize within reason. So I don't see why someone shouldn't be able to decide they can Quivering Palm once a day, so long as the DM agrees, which they should if you give a good reason why. Thats easy too, Quivering Palm isn't very good, mayhap even near useless when used once a week. So there you go.

I'm done for now.

Bassetking
2007-05-26, 01:20 AM
*snip*

In the end, I'll end up with a githzerai monk 9/tattooed monk 9. To make up for the lack monk levels, I'll choose the crab, phoenix, lion, bat, and one other undetermined tattoo. This gives me DR 10/mag, 15+lvl spell resistance, 5 smites for a bonus +4 each, and +5 dex for 9 rounds 5 times a day. Thats at 18th lvl. Saving throws will be the same as a lvl 20 monk. Trade flurry of blows for decisive strike, because flurry will be useless at 9th. Tattooed levels stack for unarmed dmg, AC bonus, and movement.

2 Ward Cestus, one for each hand, able to be adamantine because of the metal woven into it. Give it all the weapon bonuses you want, especially after getting the versatile unarmed strike feat. You won't need any other weapons, unless you want ranged. Amulet of Mighty blows +5 to make up for some lost BAB, monks belt to up BAB even more, and I know there is a feat that will make it even higher.

*snip*

Periapt of Wis +6, no gloves of dex, but from what I've heard you can still get their effect for the same price imbued into another item that is similar to gloves. Boots of striding and springing to get an extra +10 movement.

*snip*

I'm done for now.

1) If you're taking Tattooed Monk, do pick up Scorpion. Con-Damage poison as an exchange for Stunning Fist attempts is a delicious thing.

2) You're packing two necklaces there, friend. Your monk has to choose between that sexy Periapt of Wisdom and that hot little Amulet of Mighty Fists.

CervantesTheDefenestrator
2007-05-26, 01:53 AM
The monk makes a great multi-classer. A few levels of it go well with most anything. Unfortunately, they have that darned multi-classing restiction. But there are several ways to get around it. The Monastic Training feat from Eberron may seem like an atractive option, but don't be fooled. It should only be used as a last resort. Several feats in Complete Adventurer and Complete Scoundrel not only do the same thing, but offer other bonuses as well. Of course, you can always just gain the levels you want and then forget about it. And as for damage, the unarmed strike deals a lot more base damage than almost anything else at higher levels. But the lack of enhancement and potential damage reduction from an opponant balances it out. Damage reduction n/magic always sucks. I think that all non-epic DR should be both no more than 10 and overcome by something other than magic.

PlatinumJester
2007-05-26, 02:28 AM
Monks suck because:

they smell, they are poor, they are lawful, they cannot use any good weapons or armour, they have lame prestige classes, they are annoying with their meditation and crap, they are bald and they cnnot do any fun stuff.

Red Watcher: scrubbed

Attilargh
2007-05-26, 02:34 AM
they have lame prestige classes
Have you not heard of the Drunken Master, the paragon of awesome? Twin hams and a bottle of beer make the monster a sad panda.

Edo
2007-05-26, 04:08 AM
1) If you're taking Tattooed Monk, do pick up Scorpion. Con-Damage poison as an exchange for Stunning Fist attempts is a delicious thing.Methinks you mean Spider, but no more splitting hairs.

TGWG
2007-05-26, 04:35 AM
seeing as I don't have the book containing the imrpoved natural weapons feat, I can't say anything about that, thought it sounds good.

improved natural attack increased the base damage of a natural attack to the next size catagory. here's a link that might help you. :smallsmile: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Improved_Natural_Attack_%28Feat%29

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-26, 05:54 AM
Hi again,

wow, plenty of posts since my last (and I have not been able to read all avidly enough, so sorry in case I misinterpret something).

I cannot quite believe with all the evidence piled up (not only by me, but also by TGWG, Alleine, Diamondeye and Indon, among others), with numbers and rules references, that some of you still believe the monk is worthless. And the best idea of all is TGWG's suggestion to use the monk as a mount for a small character! Hilarious! :smallbiggrin:
The monk-supporters would never argue that the monk is overpowered, but it is far from being worthless or useless.

First, some remarks on individual earlier posts:
@SpiderFightWicky: Thanks for your post, we are likely now in total agreement- maybe not the AC thing (the monk can likewise get to AC 40+ with the non-armour/shield items you listed and has class AC which does not need to pay for).
Sorry about the save thing- I really cannot know your campaign or module, so it should be just fine that your fighter rarly has to do reflex saves. You could tell your monk player to play more defensively and support general combat of the party (that is the monk's strength!). And even with a 3rd archer in your group, you can do awesome stuff. Imagine a volley of 3 composite bow archers vs a spellcaster 300ft away when he casts? Yummie!

@Bardbarian: You are correct about the partial charge! (I always confound that, sorry!). However, it does not change anything.
Actually, through a flying and haste effect the monk then can partial charge 150ft, well outside the true seeing range and the ONLY class that can do such a partial charge outside a true seeing effect (even surpassing with his move anything but dragon mounts which may be difficult to hide from a balor even at that range).
It IS highly circumstance-specific, though, but the monk likewise has the best spot and listen AND move silently and hide combination of all classes (since he has high WIS and DEX as main attributes). So he is best-equipped to pull this kind of ambush attack, even on a balor, barring high-level magic such as teleport.

Which brings me to
@Aquillon: The monk is definitely NOT a one-trick pony. He is not dependent on a surprise situation, actually he is among the best classes to be prepared for a situation when HE is ambushed/surprised (since he has among the best defenses, AC, spell or otherwise). Plus, with his spot/listen he is among the LEAST likely classes to be ambushed (he could even warn the party about hidden enemies this way).
And IN a suprise situation due to the reasons outlined above he outshines everyone else, barring high-level spellcasting tricks.

and, finally
@FourthTempter
Why do you bemoan I outlined a fight vs a balor? It was asked by another poster who said the typical "nah, monk is weak, cannot even do ANYthing vs a balor at later levels". And I proved him wrong. ALL classes will be able to defeat a balor by lvl 20, I said that also before; the monk might have pulled that stunt actually already from lvl 15& up (since that is the time when he reaches the peak of his no. of attacks, ahead of the fighter, and ahead of 9th level spells of the caster classes). The items I outlined do not even add up to 250,000 gold, which is far below the wealth of a lvl 20 character.
At ALL levels the monk is a useful, even powerful class. Stunning fist and grappling tactics are even MORE powerful vs spellcasters at low levels, because those casters do not have yet all of the really powerful defenses against combat attacks (contingency, stoneskin, polymorph, MoP, MMM, whatever).

Let us recap the imo true, and not imagined weaknesses of a monk and his strength

Weaknesses:
- lower BAB vs the other combat classes (and not near the same extra damage for compensation as the rogue). However, this may be overcome with a divine power spell effect at higher levels (when the differences are the highest, and thus the gain from divine power the best). They also have flurry penalties until 9th level.
- no access to the good weapons with all their enhancements (although the improved natural attack feat suggestion by TGWG also helps a bit)
- no access to cheap armour (important in the beginning)
- thus at low levels, their combat abilities are not that strong, and can only help significantly in special situations
- no spellcasting or UMD as class skill
- er, that's it. Once more: THEY ARE NOT NOT NOT (three times should hopefully at long last drive home the message) DEPENDENT ON MAD!!!!! Wis and Dex is all you need for a good monk build. You could also try Str and Wis, or even a Wis/Chr-based monk (going the AMF/UMD route early). Or a skill monkey scholar Wis/Int monk. Whatever. Non-core, you can even get intuitive strike and zen archery to make use of Wis for combat.
The only class ability dependent on a stat is the monk's AC (Wis). Nothing else is, or rather - as for the other classes, you can make use of some stats more than others.

Strengths:
- solid skill list and skill points. They are the best of all classes likely in the movesilently/hide/spot/listen combo that determines a lot of suprise situations for encounters. (the rogue also has these class skills, but likely less WIS)
- they have the highest movement BY FAR.
- 3rd most feats of all classes (core) after fighter and wizard
- most and best special abilities. Beside the divine casters, the only class able to magially heal (if only himself). The only class able to dimension door (can also take others with him!) as a supernatural ability that cannot be countered or dispelled. The only class with 24/7 spell resistance at higher levels, the only class with 24/7 immunity to poison.
- they have the best saves (possibly only surpassed by paladins in that respect)
- best at unarmed combat. The lack of BAB is by far outshone by the higher damage, which can be both lethal and non-lethal (highly flexible; it even extends to the quivering palm where you can threaten someone with his death at any time).
- thus less dependent on equipment. There are many situations where characters are disarmed, prisoners or on social occaisions where this may be very useful.
- similarly, they can focus their magical equipment on other stuff since they do not need armour or shields, plus have better defenses so do not need as bad as other classes save improvers etc.
- they have, with flurry, from mid-levels most attacks in melee. This means with haste and divine power and two-wepaon fighting, for instance, 8 attacks per round from level from level 15 up! If he has some effect (like poison on a monk weapon, he is immune to poison effects so effectively has poison use) that demands a save-or-suck, even high-level creatures after 2 rounds of full attacks will eventually succumb to it.

Please, oh monk haters, start to see the errors of your ways and repent...:smallamused:

- Giacomo

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-26, 07:41 AM
Hi again,

wow, plenty of posts since my last (and I have not been able to read all avidly enough, so sorry in case I misinterpret something).

I cannot quite believe with all the evidence piled up (not only by me, but also by TGWG, Alleine, Diamondeye and Indon, among others), with numbers and rules references, that some of you still believe the monk is worthless. And the best idea of all is TGWG's suggestion to use the monk as a mount for a small character! Hilarious! :smallbiggrin:
The monk-supporters would never argue that the monk is overpowered, but it is far from being worthless or useless.
The numbers given have been contextless, and, often, misleading (for example, assuming one and a half rounds and many rounds of preparation for one's calculations is not a smooth move).


@Bardbarian: You are correct about the partial charge! (I always confound that, sorry!). However, it does not change anything.
Actually, through a flying and haste effect the monk then can partial charge 150ft, well outside the true seeing range and the ONLY class that can do such a partial charge outside a true seeing effect (even surpassing with his move anything but dragon mounts which may be difficult to hide from a balor even at that range).
The monk flies with a 60' speed at most, adding his +60' if he is a twentieth-level monk for 120'. Haste is an enhancement bonus to speed, as is the monk's movement speed increase.


It IS highly circumstance-specific, though, but the monk likewise has the best spot and listen AND move silently and hide combination of all classes (since he has high WIS and DEX as main attributes). So he is best-equipped to pull this kind of ambush attack, even on a balor, barring high-level magic such as teleport.
Save that balors do not sit contentedly in the middle of fields.


@FourthTempter
Why do you bemoan I outlined a fight vs a balor? It was asked by another poster who said the typical "nah, monk is weak, cannot even do ANYthing vs a balor at later levels". And I proved him wrong. ALL classes will be able to defeat a balor by lvl 20, I said that also before; the monk might have pulled that stunt actually already from lvl 15& up (since that is the time when he reaches the peak of his no. of attacks, ahead of the fighter, and ahead of 9th level spells of the caster classes). The items I outlined do not even add up to 250,000 gold, which is far below the wealth of a lvl 20 character.
At ALL levels the monk is a useful, even powerful class. Stunning fist and grappling tactics are even MORE powerful vs spellcasters at low levels, because those casters do not have yet all of the really powerful defenses against combat attacks (contingency, stoneskin, polymorph, MoP, MMM, whatever).
I bemoan the situation you outlined because you selected a situation that is not relevant to any sort of real play. Honestly! You grant your monk a surprise round and initiative, and not only that, but you give him the aid of friendly spellcasters for his Rings of Spell Storing, and you even go so far as to assume he will always have an Antimagic Field he has a 30% chance at level 20 of producing! That is, when fighting a spellcaster--the most mobile kind of enemy--he will always know far enough in advance to attempt to activate a scroll repeatedly, before charging in undetected.

The items you outlined are not the only ones the monk will need--besides which, a level 15 monk would only have 200,000 gold worth of equipment. What does he purchase? Does he have NO other items and only one ring of spell storing?


Let us recap the imo true, and not imagined weaknesses of a monk and his strength

Weaknesses:
- lower BAB vs the other combat classes (and not near the same extra damage for compensation as the rogue). However, this may be overcome with a divine power spell effect at higher levels (when the differences are the highest, and thus the gain from divine power the best). They also have flurry penalties until 9th level.
Where are you getting so many Divine Powers? When are you activating them? Are you expending a combat round (one on this, another on Righteous Might, and so on)?


- no access to the good weapons with all their enhancements (although the improved natural attack feat suggestion by TGWG also helps a bit)
Improved Natural Attack increases damage slightly, but not up to par (a high-dexerity/wisdom monk will do little damage). Attack bonus increases are more useful than flaming and the like, incidentally.


- no access to cheap armour (important in the beginning)
- thus at low levels, their combat abilities are not that strong, and can only help significantly in special situations
- no spellcasting or UMD as class skill
- er, that's it. Once more: THEY ARE NOT NOT NOT (three times should hopefully at long last drive home the message) DEPENDENT ON MAD!!!!! Wis and Dex is all you need for a good monk build. You could also try Str and Wis, or even a Wis/Chr-based monk (going the AMF/UMD route early). Or a skill monkey scholar Wis/Int monk. Whatever. Non-core, you can even get intuitive strike and zen archery to make use of Wis for combat.
The only class ability dependent on a stat is the monk's AC (Wis). Nothing else is, or rather - as for the other classes, you can make use of some stats more than others.
A high-dexterity, high-wisdom monk will have a low Constitution (meaning his good Fortitude saving throws are in fact mediocre) leading to low hit points, and he will do little damage. No character can afford to neglect Constitution, and a low-strength character requires an extra damage source.
The concept of relying on Antimagic Field and Use Magic Device is absolutely ridiculous, as you have a 30% chance of activating the Field in combat at 20th level, and doing so is a poor decision 99 times out of 100, as it only helps when you are beside a pure spellcaster. Monsters will smile and eat the antimagic monk.



Strengths:
- solid skill list and skill points. They are the best of all classes likely in the movesilently/hide/spot/listen combo that determines a lot of suprise situations for encounters. (the rogue also has these class skills, but likely less WIS)
Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Spot, Use Magic Device cross-class... so, how are you acquiring Tumble ranks, or the Jump you were boasting of? Monks can not afford to raise Intelligence and have four base skill points. They can, in fact, not both sneak and be alert and do everything else you described.


- they have the highest movement BY FAR.
Now, if only that were relevant for any opponents but the ones sitting in the middle of a field with True Strike.


- 3rd most feats of all classes (core) after fighter and wizard
Completely irrelevant. How many feats you have means nothing--for example, the Samurai class has a number of "feats"... and they are all terrible.


- most and best special abilities. Beside the divine casters, the only class able to magially heal (if only himself). The only class able to dimension door (can also take others with him!) as a supernatural ability that cannot be countered or dispelled. The only class with 24/7 spell resistance at higher levels, the only class with 24/7 immunity to poison.
Their Dimension Door is once per day, their self-healing is a negligible amount, poison immunity is highly situational, and while Spell Resistance is nice, it, too, is situational for a player character (and it should be higher to truly matter).


- they have the best saves (possibly only surpassed by paladins in that respect)
They do have the best base saves; kindly note that this is a far cry from having the best total saves. Clerics and druids will both have better Fortitude and Will saves. Any other class with a good Fortitude save will have a better Fortitude save. In addition, if they wish to wear Wings of Flying, they must give up their Cloak of Resistance, losing an effective +5 in comparison.


- best at unarmed combat. The lack of BAB is by far outshone by the higher damage, which can be both lethal and non-lethal (highly flexible; it even extends to the quivering palm where you can threaten someone with his death at any time).
- thus less dependent on equipment. There are many situations where characters are disarmed, prisoners or on social occaisions where this may be very useful.
Best at *unarmed* combat. What of it? There is no need for unarmed combat. Even if every single campaign, characters are taken prisoner (how often does this happen, precisely, per game?) that is a rare situation. The lack of Base Attack Bonus is not outshone by the higher damage, because their damage is low, as they are raising Dexterity and Wisdom.


- similarly, they can focus their magical equipment on other stuff since they do not need armour or shields, plus have better defenses so do not need as bad as other classes save improvers etc.
Without saving throw improvers, their saving throws lag behind. They require magical equipment that other classes do not, they have equipment conflicts (which amulet are you wearing, again? A Periapt of Wisdom, an Amulet of Natural Armor, or an Amulet of Mighty Fists?) and in general need no less gold to spend than other classes.


- they have, with flurry, from mid-levels most attacks in melee. This means with haste and divine power and two-wepaon fighting, for instance, 8 attacks per round from level from level 15 up! If he has some effect (like poison on a monk weapon, he is immune to poison effects so effectively has poison use) that demands a save-or-suck, even high-level creatures after 2 rounds of full attacks will eventually succumb to it.
The monk does not have Divine Power. He only has Haste for 10 rounds a day (Boots of Speed), or if the spellcaster is feeling friendly; melee characters have Speed weapons. 8 low-damage attacks sound impressive, but they are at low attack bonuses as well, and the responding full attack (as the monk is in melee whenever he is flurrying) will by and large be very painful.


Please, oh monk haters, start to see the errors of your ways and repent...:smallamused:

- Giacomo
I am sorry, but no. This is precisely what I meant about blowing tiny details out of proportion and doing your best to interpret things avantageously rather than literally.

What does your monk look like, at level three? Six? Nine? Twelve? Fifteen? Eighteen? I have seen many things bandied about, but they have been thoroughly situational (a surprise round right after activating Divine Power from a ring), contradictory (which amulet are you wearing? What do you purchase for your cloak slot?), or simply erroneous or misguided

I will attempt to design such a monk myself tomorrow, to show you the error in some of the things you have said. For now, I sleep.

TGWG
2007-05-26, 09:30 AM
:smallbiggrin:
A high-dexterity, high-wisdom monk will have a low Constitution (meaning his good Fortitude saving throws are in fact mediocre) leading to low hit points, and he will do little damage.

you are forgeting the near mandatory weapon finesse feat monks should gain at lev 3. seriously though, I agree with you that without this feat Monks do minuscule damage.

and how will the monk have "mediocre" fortitude saves? Their base fortitude saves is on par with any warrior/babarian/paladin/whatever.
that leaves it up to the constitution modifiers to settle things. CONSTITUTION MODIFIER, as in "for every two points above lev 10 they get only a +1." If Constitution is the third most important ability for a monk and the second most important ability for a fighter then on average a monk should have only 1 less constitution modifier then the a fighter/barbarian/paladin (2 less at the most). From there it's all on where the character chooses to put their ability bonuses.

Now this above paragraph assumes that all players divide there stats by these guidlines, this is not true. A fighter may chose to have Strenght as his primary abillity and dish out major damage, a monk may do the same thing with WIS and have an AC you couldn't hit with an avalanche; or they could both focus on Constitution and come up with pretty much the same fortititude saves. there are others but they all depends on three things, where the player wants to put his ability scores, how the player wants to play the class, and how great their luck is when they roll the dice. (an optional fourth would be how well they can cheat without their DM noticing)

from this I have to say the Monk's fortitude saves are ABOVE-AVERAGE, not MEDIOCRE, not THE BEST, but above average. provided that the CON was the fighter's second and the monk's third

After saying all that in favor of the monk, now I most say something incredebly debilitating for that very cause because I am a nuetral party in this debate and wish to remain so.:smallbiggrin:

The monk can not function well without a primary fighter by his side, the monk NEEDS the flanking bonus from someone who won't die/run away/expire in an extremely untimely manner, and someone who can set the enemy up for all around full melee attacks, (there are a few exceptions but they all include a combination of high ability rolls, an unchallenging campaign, 10 sorcerors behind you, 10 clerics behind you, a extremely drunken dragon foe who does nothing but smoke puff rings while your party spends 3 days hacking their way into it's heart, and exagerated homeruled systems that - overnight - turns the monk into a miniature superman.); A monk cannot function AS the parties primary fighter, if the monk dies (normaly it happens because the enemy found a way past his high AC, incredible saves, and spell resitence which is actualy, occasionaly, easier then it sounds) then there is no one else who can stop the enemy from getting to the spellcasters (exceptions; see above); without a primary fighter all of a monk's weaknesses show up more, and many of his strengths cease to be strenghts, A monk's increased mobility becomes moot because he has to stay between the enemy and the party casters, he won't hit anything with his BAB especialy when he needs to; abundant step(offensive use) see increased mobility, and even if he does hit anything it'll be of a miniscule damage (exceptions, see the Febuary 31st).

Indon
2007-05-26, 09:55 AM
I will attempt to design such a monk myself tomorrow, to show you the error in some of the things you have said. For now, I sleep.

A couple tips, then:

Purchase Simple Weapon Proficiency so that you can use Cold Iron, Mithral, or Adamantine (eh) gauntlets. Enchant one set of them, focus on getting +5 to hit goodness (Edit: if you really wanna cheese, get Wounding too).

Take Improved Natural Attack (I think it's in a monster manual), at least.

You could take Improved Unarmed Strike (Tome of Battle, I do believe), in which case you should also grab a Monk's Belt, but really if you do that you might as well start taking some good Monk PrC's after level 11, if you're aiming for offense anyway (I guess that might be a good reason to keep Adamantine gauntlets around, eh?).

Learn to pounce.

Get a ring of deflection (Personally, I wouldn't bother with above a +3).

A lot from here depends on what you want your monk to do. Stat choice is difficult to predict from here; you could focus on strength, get your Pounce on, your AC drops and you essentially turn into a faster Shock Trooper with a couple more skill points. This'd also be your best bet if you wanted to sunder weapons or shields (You don't need high strength if you want to sunder worn items, there's no opposed attack roll, so at most 13 so you could eventually grab Imp. Sunder). Here's where you'd grab that Amulet of Mighty Fists.

Focusing on dex doesn't carry too much benefit. Wis gives you AC, too, and if you wanted to be a ranged character you could just take Zen Archery, pump your wisdom sky-high, and be a scout who moves faster. Choosing not to front-line fight would also let you raise your int to grab some sweet extra skill points. If you really want AC, take Combat Expertise, and mind that even holding a 2-handed ranged weapon, you still threaten with your feet.

Con is a secondary stat, like for everyone.

Focusing on Wisdom gives you crazy Stunning Fist action, making you essentially a fast battlefield controller. Grab Zen Archery because if you aren't stunning with this build, you shouldn't be in melee, and grab that one Intuitive Strike feat or whatever that makes your melee to-hit rolls based on wisdom, too, so you can reliably hit with your impressive Stunning Fists. Take the periapt of Wisdom.

Focusing on Intelligence makes you a scout and secondary skill monkey (this only because Disable Device and Search are not class skills). Take Combat Expertise (I guess this'd be a good time for an amulet of natural armor or the like.) for dangerous combats and make like a faster rogue. This is also the route to go if you're going to be party face, because raising Diplomacy and Sense Motive is way better than trying to raise your charisma as a monk. Also, buy a spyglass. It halves distance penalties for spot checks to start encounters, so your party can see random encounter Balors in fields that much easier.

Focusing on Charisma... eh, yeah.

If you're building a monk that travels with spellcasters and can be expected to recieve buffs, your other ring should be of Spell Turning. With a simple Polymorph (Or if it doesn't exist, something size-enlarging) from a friend, even (especially) your wisdom-based monk can suddenly be zillaing it up alongside the divine casters.

So, yeah. Don't try to do absolutely everything at once as a monk. That's like trying to make a Power Attack/Trip/Archer Feat/Expertise/Leadership (needed a feat based on CHA) Fighter. Specialize, and you will rock at a single thing, and still do well in other things.

That's about everything I can think of off the top of my head. Other monk lovers, if you've better build advice than I (no doubt not hard) please correct me.

Talya
2007-05-26, 10:32 AM
:smallbiggrin:

you are forgeting the near mandatory weapon finesse feat monks should gain at lev 3. seriously though, I agree with you that without this feat Monks do minuscule damage.

What? Weapon finesse doesn't increase damage, you don't gain dexterity to damage, only to hit. And no, a smart monk doesn't take Weapon Finesse at level 3, they take Intuitive Attack. (Wisdom to hit.) That still doesn't raise their damage, but a monk is better raising wisdom than dexterity.


and how will the monk have "mediocre" fortitude saves?

+12 is mediocre. +16 is decent. +6 is terrible.

TGWG
2007-05-26, 11:16 AM
+12 is mediocre. +16 is decent. +6 is terrible.

that still means that the monk has an above average fortitude save.

Talya
2007-05-26, 12:00 PM
that still means that the monk has an above average fortitude save.


Only if they prioritize constitution.

Since that comes at the expense of wisdom, dexterity, and strength, which they also need, how are they going to do that?

Aquillion
2007-05-26, 12:23 PM
that still means that the monk has an above average fortitude save.Not at all. Assuming 12 is their final total (and all the builds here have ended up using the slots required for save-raising items for other essential things), it is below average. A wizard with a +5 Cloak of Resistance and +2 or more from Con (remember, Con is the second-priority stat for most mages, since they need to offset their d4s, so they'll likely have more than that) is going to have a higher fort save than the monk. In fact, so would an equal-level commoner.


I cannot quite believe with all the evidence piled up (not only by me, but also by TGWG, Alleine, Diamondeye and Indon, among others), with numbers and rules references, that some of you still believe the monk is worthless.We've shown, repeatedly, why those numbers and rules don't help the monk. Your strategy was the most comical, depending on treating the monk like a skill-monkey with listen, move silently, UMD (cross-class!), and so forth despite their low INT, with the assumption that they will always get a surprise round, and by using, basically, magic items and other classes' spells for the key effects (at the cost of half your level-20 WBL) instead of monk powers... a 'strategy' like that is as much as admitting that the monk is ineffective! And, on top of all that, with all your absurd assumptions, it still didn't work as described--it is very hard to get a surprise round while charging, and you forgot to take that penalty into account. With it, none of what you posted works out, and your monk gets slaughtered despite the absurd bonuses you gave them... gets slaughtered, note, doing something that most other classes of the same level could have accomplished easily. Killing a Balor is not a monumental task; most classes wouldn't need to spend all their WBL or develop a page-long strategy to prepare for that one fight, and wouldn't need to assume they can somehow take the enemy by surprise on a charge.

You need to realize a few vital things, though. First: Monks are one of the most expensive classes to equip. You keep repeating that myth about their low cost, even though numerous people have explained its fallacy to you, without being rebutted. The monk's limited equipment options are a disadvantage, a huge, class-gimping crippling one; somehow, most fans of the class have twisted them around into an advantage, but this simply isn't so. Monks, like any class that wants to take advantage of multiple attacks, still need a source of extra damage on each hit, which is hugely expensive without normal weapon options. (They also need a way to make a full attack on a charge, which is, well, not available to them.) Even with wis to AC, they need stat-boosters and AC-boosters just to keep up with the comparatively cheap and easily-obtained enchanted armor other melee classes depend on. Like all melee classes, they still need magic items to provide basic mobility effects like flight, or things like detect invisible. And for all of this, they're basically missing or severely limited in the two most important locations for enchanted equipment, weapon and armor.

Even with all this, they'll have trouble piercing most damage resistance, no way to use both their mobility and full attack at the same time, generally flimsy HP, a choice between sucking at AC (in which case they can never survive standing and full-attacking) or sucking at STR (in which case they're never going to do good damage even if they do stand and fight, absent totally absurd levels of buffing), and so forth. Other people have described it better... you haven't responded to any of this.

Ergo, despite your loud claims, I think you've quietly admitted that monks aren't that great a class. You like them a lot, we get that, but you haven't presented any arguments for them being any good that didn't get shot down two seconds later, and you've ignored most of the reasons why they're so weak.

Alleine
2007-05-26, 12:32 PM
2) You're packing two necklaces there, friend. Your monk has to choose between that sexy Periapt of Wisdom and that hot little Amulet of Mighty Fists.

My apologies, I would move for the amulet of Mighty Blows in favor of actually hitting things.

People keep saying the monks saving throws aren't all that good, I disagree. Their base saves are better than any other core class, and a monks focus ought to be on dex and wis, making reflex and will saves even higher!
Eventually, a monk becomes well nigh impenetrable to magic attacks(with the exception of magic missile). To begin with, evasion. Take half damage if you make the saving throw for most spells and spell like abilities such as breath weapon. Next: Improved evasion, now you can fully dodge many spells, and when you fail you only take half damage or lower once you add in spell resistance.

I'm about to assume many of you have been looking at the monk in the wrong light. Comparison to a fighter for damage and attacks? Doesn't quite match up. Sneakiness for a rogue? Doesn't match up. The key is that a monk is a SUPPORT character, never meant to take the place of others, thats what bards and other jack-of-all trades classes are for. If the fighter needs to back out of a situation the monk is a great stand-in while the fighter gets healing or whatever. If you want a fighter, don't complain that the monk isn't a high powered destruction class, go find a different one that does specialize in pain. There are many, it isn't that hard.

Some have complained that dimension door 1/day isn't worth it. What do you do that requires more than one? If its that important to move around, be a psion for the psychoportation.

Here I go, assuming again. Normally, you have a well balanced party, say one to two major spellcasters(Wizard, druid, sorcerer), at least one fighting class (Fighter, barbarian, etc.), a rogue, a cleric for healing, and a mix of other things such as a bard that are generally useful. Monks fit in nicely, they compliment a fighter's attacks by running around to provide flanking, they can keep an enemy occupied while a wizard blasts the area to hell, leaving the monk relatively unscathed. Monks provide a largely unspecialized class that can sustain itself with little help, so the cleric doesn't have to worry about healing everyone, and if you're smart you carry around a few potions for emergencies.

Stunning fist is very helpful early on when enemies fortitude saves aren't great, a free round to beat the crud out of whatever just got stunned. A monk can easily walk to the aid of other party members who may simply need a distraction for an enemy whereas it might take a fighter too long to make his way there to give aid in time.

A monk isn't useless. However, a monk is not a fighter, it can stand in for a fighter long enough for the actual fighter to arrive.

I stress again, as I did before, that the DM's guide and the PHB2 urge players to make their own characters, and rely on what is provided as only a base template for somthing that only your unique imagination can cook up. So, take the monk and tweak it, its not illegal nor harmful as long as you make it balanced. Heck, you can even base your monks powers off of the personality traits described in PHB2.

Jasdoif
2007-05-26, 01:10 PM
You could take Improved Unarmed Strike (Tome of Battle, I do believe), in which case you should also grab a Monk's Belt, but really if you do that you might as well start taking some good Monk PrC's after level 11, if you're aiming for offense anyway (I guess that might be a good reason to keep Adamantine gauntlets around, eh?).I believe you're thinking of Superior Unarmed Strike, which is indeed in Tome of Battle. Improved Unarmed Strike is the one monks get as a bonus feat at first level.

However, Superior Unarmed Strike doesn't stack with a Monk's Belt. They're both based on your actual monk level, and neither of them are worded to improve your monk level "for the purpose of determining unarmed strike damage" or similar, so their effects overlap. The Monk's Belt is better though (five levels higher vs four levels higher), so if you're using one then you can use that feat slot for something else.

Talya
2007-05-26, 01:12 PM
I believe you're thinking of Superior Unarmed Strike, which is indeed in Tome of Battle. Improved Unarmed Strike is the one monks get as a bonus feat at first level.

However, Superior Unarmed Strike doesn't stack with a Monk's Belt. They're both based on your actual monk level, and neither of them are worded to improve your monk level "for the purpose of determining unarmed strike damage" or similar, so their effects overlap. The Monk's Belt is better though (five levels higher vs four levels higher), so if you're using one then you can use that feat slot for something else.

Since monk unarmed damage doesn't actually improve beyond level 20, if you plan on actually hitting monk level 20, Superior Unarmed Strike is a poor feat choice.

Which is fine, just take Improved Natural Attack. going from 2d10 to 4d8 is ian average +7 damage per hit, which is equivalent to getting a +14 strength boost.