PDA

View Full Version : So what would YOU have a monk do?



13_CBS
2007-07-23, 09:41 AM
For this excercise, let's assume that the monk is now an effective character (whatever that could mean).

So if the monk were the fifth character in a party of "classic 4" (fighter, rouge, cleric, wizard/sorc), what would you have it do?

Warning! No arguments over monk effectiveness please.

JellyPooga
2007-07-23, 09:44 AM
Stealth around being philosophical and contemplative a lot and occasionally cause an enemies spleen to exit his body via his ears, using only his little finger.

Jimbob
2007-07-23, 09:49 AM
Arcane spell caster killer. And double up skill monkey.

ZeroNumerous
2007-07-23, 09:49 AM
In all honesty, I'd have the Monk run at the nearest town guardsman and punch him in the face. After his death, I'd roll up a Swordsage. But I think that's not what you're looking for with this thread.

Personally, if I were ever wrangled into making a monk via any combination of blackmail, bribery, drunken revelry, or violence.. Then my monk would be building toward the Drunken Master PrC(Comp. Warrior). Until then, he would throw rocks at the biggest, baddest monster and then run away. Hopefully, this will provide the rest of the party a chance to do what they do and mop up the enemy.

That would, in my opinion, be one of the few ways to be effective to any sort of balanced party. Your twelve-seconds of spotlight before the enemy tears you in half is enough to atleast buy some time for the rest of your party to do something.

Indon
2007-07-23, 09:50 AM
He's the guy who can go and stealth off with the rogue, flank for the Fighter's and Cleric's charges, and run through his Wizard's Solid Fog.

Basically, when another player needs support in the area of their expertise, the Monk is able to supply it.

rollfrenzy
2007-07-23, 09:51 AM
Oriental Monk? I would have them fill the role of second fighter, with some special abilities or a quick strike fighter.

In a medievil setting? I would have them fill a more religous role.

nweismuller
2007-07-23, 10:02 AM
I *think* what's being asked is 'what role does the monk class, as it exists, serve', but 'what role SHOULD a redesigned monk class intended to play nicely with the Classic Four serve'. I think.

Jerthanis
2007-07-23, 10:04 AM
Is this a discussion about what the current monk mechanics would do if it were effective to do that, or a discussion about what a monk should be able to do at level 5 which we consider effective?

For me, I'd like to see Monks become full-on melee versions of Save-or-Suck and later Save-or-die effects, all based on Stunning Fist.

Fatigue someone with a single blow, Exhaust them with the next! Stun them, drain their ability scores, mix up the saving throws, so they can possibly effect fighter types once in a while, halve their movement rates and give them untyped penalties to attack! Stuff like that is what I'd have monks do. Let them create custom "comboes" by letting them combine their stunning fist uses in specific ways. Perhaps one monk has a 3 hit combo of a Reflex based save-or-knockdown followed by a Will based disarm effect (pressure point to cause pain unless they release their weapon, will save to resist the pain) and then a standard monk stunning blow... expending 3 stunning fist attempts, while another Monk might have a Fatiguing strike, followed by another fatiguing strike, followed by a Reflex based 1-3 round blindness (poke in the eyes maybe), also at the expense of 3 stunning fist attempts.

lord_khaine
2007-07-23, 10:07 AM
i would have him do what i usualy do, play as a mobile combatant assulting things that doesnt like melee combat as fx archer/ranget/support casters.

or when those are not around, either use trip/stun/grabble to battlefield control, and act as a melee support for whoever else is in melee.

s.donahue
2007-07-23, 10:09 AM
Whenever I think of a monk, I think of someone who has spent years practicing and training, so I never really think of a monk as being first level. A monk versus a fighter of equal experience wouldn't be a fair fight, but that's the whole point, monks are supposed to have spent most of their lives training, so they should be more experienced. I guess what I'm saying is that a monk ought to be higher level than the rest of the party or something, I dunno. Somewhere lost in this incoherent rambling is my original point

PinkysBrain
2007-07-23, 10:18 AM
Front line combatant.

Sir Giacomo
2007-07-23, 10:19 AM
So if the monk were the fifth character in a party of "classic 4" (fighter, rouge, cleric, wizard/sorc), what would you have it do?


...still working on it...but suffice to say the monk at low-mid levels should only be in melee when it is really worth it (that decisive flank, saving a dying friend with his move and abundant step, overcoming the enemy spell caster).

- Giacomo

Swooper
2007-07-23, 10:23 AM
If you mean "how to make the most of the monk class as it is" I'd answer: "Interpreter, as soon as he gets Tongue of the Sun and Moon*. High AC mobile meatshield 'till then."

If you mean "how would you redisign the monk to have an actual role in a group" I'd answer: "Mobile, hard-to hit, special effects meleeist. Stuns, ability damage etc. Conditions that make enemies suck. A swift kick to the stomach could make the target nauseous for a couple of rounds. Stuff like that."

*Seriously, what is the deal with that ability? How does monastic combat training teach you all languages suddenly?

magicwalker
2007-07-23, 10:30 AM
I think it might have something to do with enlightenment...

Catharsis
2007-07-23, 10:33 AM
For me, I'd like to see Monks become full-on melee versions of Save-or-Suck and later Save-or-die effects, all based on Stunning Fist.

(SNIP)

Huh. That's a monk I'd actually like to play. It sounds effective, fun, contributive, and even fits the flavor. The combos are an especially nice idea.

Of course, the question remains that if a kick to the stomach makes you nauseated, why does a sword to the stomach let you full-attack next round?

Arbitrarity
2007-07-23, 10:36 AM
Great. Now I have to make a save-or-X based monk.

Ah well, time to try my hand at homebrewing.

Hmm... ToB style (per encounter), or per day?

Lapak
2007-07-23, 10:39 AM
Tricky question. Front-line warrior? That's the fighter's niche.
Arcane power is covered, sneaky skillfulness is covered. My first instinct was spiritual adviser, but clearly you'd be stepping on the cleric's toes at least a little there. But if we take the gods out of 'spiritual adviser', we get -

Knowledge-based (as opposed to sneaky or social) skillmonkey, with additional capacity for leadership. To give him this niche, we'd have to alter the wizard somehow and make him less generally-knowledgeable, but I could see a home for a monk - Eastern or Western - in the 'wise man who guides the group' slot. Add some abilities that support the group in combat or allow them to work more effectively as a team, and you might have something.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-23, 10:41 AM
Die or power up. Almost any PC class or classes + a level or two of Monk is usually better than going straight Monk.

Going Sword Sage with 2 levels of Monk is usually better than going straight Monk.

Seriously I'd have the Monk start off as a Psi Rogue -1 with the Hidden Talent feat (& Allow that to meet the Enlightened Fist PRC requirement for Wild Talent) or Rogue -1, Take a level of Ninja -1, Take a level of Monk -1 with Ascetic Rogue as your level 3 feat to combine the Sneak Attack and Unarmed Combat damage. Take a level of Sword Sage -1 taking that fifth level in Monk, Sword Sage, Ninja, Rogue or Psi Rogue depending on what your PC wants. Now just advancing in those base classes besides Monk is generally better than straight Monk.

The Enlightened Fist PRC requires the Still Mind class feature (Monk -3 normally), +4 BAB, Concentration- 9 ranks and Wild Talent.

To improve the Monk class I'd give it Adept spellcasting or Psi Rogue mechanic psionic power points using the Psychic Warrior power lists.

Telonius
2007-07-23, 11:46 AM
For this excercise, let's assume that the monk is now an effective character (whatever that could mean).

So if the monk were the fifth character in a party of "classic 4" (fighter, rouge, cleric, wizard/sorc), what would you have it do?

Warning! No arguments over monk effectiveness please.

The monk and the rogue would become best friends. Scout together, flank lower-level guys together. Leave the Big Monster to the Fighter. The Monk should also be the emergency get-the-wizard-out-of-trouble guy. If for some reason Batman gets himself into a sticky situation, the Monk should use that speed bonus to go and disarm/trip/grapple the situation.

Koji
2007-07-23, 12:00 PM
I would have him on call to shut down spellcasters with superior saves, stunning, and grappling, as well as to set up combos for other characters by flanking, stunning, and outmaneuvering the enemy.

giblina
2007-07-23, 12:11 PM
Utilize tumble skill combined with high base movement speed to help create flanking opportunities for other characters (especially rogues).

Keep stealth skill high so the rogue never has to scout alone.

Trip enemies so they provoke attacks of opportunity every time they stand up :)

mostlyharmful
2007-07-23, 12:23 PM
for me the real chance for specialization/niche in such a group is Gish, make the monk a caster that can only cast internally, ie buffs, and make them useful incombat.

Alleine
2007-07-23, 01:00 PM
At lower levels, do whatever you want, but eventually pick up the Ki Blast feat from PHB2 and you can sit in the back and blast away with 3d6 + wis in most battles. You'll get enough stunning fist uses to make this a good tactic, IMO, plus its a ranged touch attack. Or make it what the monk does when he runs up and attacks the enemy, except from a distance so he doesn't get killed while waiting for the rest of the group.

giblina
2007-07-23, 01:22 PM
Won't a warlock be 1000 times better than that?

bugsysservant
2007-07-23, 01:30 PM
Well, if I was going for monk as is, I would make it mage/archer killer+versatility flanker.

If I were going for what the monk should be, I would like to see a lot more mobility, dexterity centered abilities. Save or die, and heavy combat is all well and good, but fighters and wizards do those far more than a monk ever will or should. I would like to see a monk who gets spring attack and combat reflexes as bonus feats, a monk that flanks an opponent even when not directly opposite, a monk who even has a sneak attack progression. The monk I envision would be a fast, agile combatant, adept at taking out individual targets, and avoiding being hit. A monk should be a cross between a kickass scout (not the crappy class, a real scout), and a focused fighter who uses precision and speed to debilitate and bewilder foes. But that's probably not what this discussion is about.

Edit:minor typos

Aquillion
2007-07-23, 01:39 PM
I would take him out of core, for starters. He doesn't have any place there--he's very, very tightly tied to a single theme, unlike the other core classes, and he's generally based on a single narrow concept

The other core classes generally represent a range of themes... the Paladin can be any holy warrior, say; the fighter can be any fighter-type; the rogue can be any sneaky-skill type; etc. The monk is bruce lee and that is all; it's a class based entirely on flavor... And flavor-based classes (or PRCs--turning Monk into a fighter PRC might just be a good idea, with a few more barehanded fighting feats to support the five levels until they can enter) are great for supplements, but they don't have any place in core.

In fact, that's what I'd do... thematically, monk is too specific to be a base class at all. I'd make some decent barehanded fighting feats that fighters can take early on using their bonus feats, then make Monk a fighter-oriented PRC that they can enter using those feats as prequisites. Using that, it might be able to enter core.

...so, um, what could a monk do at 5th level? Well, I suppose my technical answer to that would be "optimally, monks wouldn't exist at that level, but someone aiming for monk at that point would be about to enter the PRC, and would be a flavor of fighter who uses their bare hands, with feats that give enough of a bonus to make this a decent option (well, not just enough to make it a decent option--enough to be worth the cost of a feat.)"

Roderick_BR
2007-07-23, 02:08 PM
I would use him sneak around enemies, and give flanking opportunities for fighters and rogues, like I'd do as a ranger, I guess. And have him as a secondary skill monkey.
Monks are third wheel fighter/rogues, like bards are third wheel wizard/cleric/rogues. They are there to add to a group, not replace one of the classic 4.

PS: Love to see how people IS discussing a monk's effectiveness, even though the OP asked not to :smalltongue:

Telonius
2007-07-23, 02:19 PM
Well, it's kinda hard to discuss what I'd have a monk do, without paying attention to what the monk is good at. The fact the the OP is pretty ambiguously worded doesn't help either.

LotharBot
2007-07-23, 02:21 PM
our half-ogre monk is build around combat reflexes and trip attacks.

I like the idea of monks being based around mobility, positioning (flanking), and status effects: stunning fist, barfing knee, dizzying headbutt, tripping kick, distracting elbow, and hypnotic chant. Make the stun, nausea, and dizzy effects fort saves, the trip a reflex save (or an opposed check as a normal trip), the elbow a concentration check, and the chant a will save.

metawidget
2007-07-23, 02:48 PM
Whenever I think of a monk, I think of someone who has spent years practicing and training, so I never really think of a monk as being first level. A monk versus a fighter of equal experience wouldn't be a fair fight, but that's the whole point, monks are supposed to have spent most of their lives training, so they should be more experienced. I guess what I'm saying is that a monk ought to be higher level than the rest of the party or something, I dunno. Somewhere lost in this incoherent rambling is my original point

I think the varied starting ages reflect that thought — and toe-to-toe, a monk should be shredded by a fighter of equivalent level. I agree with the thought above that in combat, a monk should be the mobile one who takes out soft targets: casters, archers, etc. as well as being able to arrive fast wherever needed to bail out friendly soft targets or flank. Outside of combat, stealth, mobility and scouting capabilities would free up the rogue to be better at fast-taking and mechanical skills. Lapak mentions having to nerf the classic four — it's not so much nerfing as it is re-dividing the tasks to be done (and given that my players have never quite slotted neatly, one-per-classic-role, it's not such a hardship).

Clove
2007-07-23, 02:49 PM
I agree that the monk should be the party "grappler". Grappling is a form of fighting that the fighter will not be too good at, because he probably wears heavier armor and uses large weapons.

Grappling is a niche combat form, but when it works it really works well.

The monk's speed, stunning blow, and manueverability (tumbling) also allow him to single out one dangerous opponent in many situations that may be someplace that is difficult for the rest of the party to reach.

Other than that, if your monk is in a balanced party with a wizard or sorcerer... consider having the monk wear wizard robes and the wizard wear monk robes. This way if an intelligent enemy singles out your spellcaster they get the wrong guy. You know, in case the bad guys want to single out someone important. Then they get the monk instead. Hahahaha.

Neither the wizard nor monk wear armor, so their choice of clothing is really up to them anyways.

Koji
2007-07-23, 02:58 PM
I agree that the monk should be the party "grappler". Grappling is a form of fighting that the fighter will not be too good at, because he probably wears heavier armor and uses large weapons.

Actually, fighters are BETTER grapplers (as long as they take imp. grapple) due to the fact that they can wear spiked armor, and have a higher BaB (and generally strength as well). Dropping a weapon is a free action, so it's not like they're penalized for having one.

Clove
2007-07-23, 03:00 PM
Also...

Get a missile weapon! I don't care if you use throwing rocks even. Simply having an option to turn to other than running into melee every time is BIG. A monk without a missile weapon feels obligated to rush into every melee, and sometimes it is just plain dumb depending on the situation.

Remember a monk can hold things in his hands and still make their normal melee attacks, unlike most other characters. So there is no penalty to holding a crossbow or other item while kicking or headbutting an enemy.

Clove
2007-07-23, 03:07 PM
Actually, fighters are BETTER grapplers (as long as they take imp. grapple) due to the fact that they can wear spiked armor, and have a higher BaB (and generally strength as well). Dropping a weapon is a free action, so it's not like they're penalized for having one.

You're right. But most fighters don't focus on grappling. If you've only got so many monetary resources to spend and you magic up your sword you have less to enchant your armor spikes.

And man do I hate dropping my super-weapon in a fight when I'm grappled. I do it, but I'm always thinking a goblin could run up, pick up the weapon, and run away... This never happens, DMs usually aren't this mean.

A fighter can focus on armor spikes, but as a light weapon they are less damaging than a larger weapon. So they are less optimized for toe-to-toe fights which is exactly the thing the balanced party begs the fighter to take care of.

Keld Denar
2007-07-23, 03:29 PM
Also...

Get a missile weapon! I don't care if you use throwing rocks even. Simply having an option to turn to other than running into melee every time is BIG. A monk without a missile weapon feels obligated to rush into every melee, and sometimes it is just plain dumb depending on the situation.

Remember a monk can hold things in his hands and still make their normal melee attacks, unlike most other characters. So there is no penalty to holding a crossbow or other item while kicking or headbutting an enemy.

This is very important. I have a monk character (level 3) who always has his hands full. He keeps a sling in 1 hand, and a cold iron kama in the other. He attacks most of the time with kicks and elbow strikes. Its really nice not to have to spend actions (or feats) to be able to switch from melee to ranged at the cost of 0 actions. Sling is a nice weapon for a high strength monk (like mine) because 1d4+3 is higher average damage than 1d8 from a light crossbow, and unless you are an elven monk, you don't have proficeny with composite longbows to otherwise use your str damage.

One of the primary flaws a monk shares with a cleric, is via core, items that add Wisdom take the same slot as items that add CON. This is a problem with a melee typed character who relys on both. Sure, you can wear gloves of dex, but dex AC just isn't as good as wis AC for a monk. Both give the same points, but dex only adds to init and a couple skills, while wis adds to save DCs. That's a big deal.

Jebediah Crump
2007-07-23, 04:02 PM
I played a monk a while back and it was probably the most fun character I have ever played as. Early on i was not the most usefull though, actually now that I think about it I was the least Usefull in the group. But as the group started to level and I got more abilities and feats that let me catch up to the group in usefullness. I never had a problem with dying despite the fact that i always ran straight into combat. That could have been because of luck, but I think it was because of all the great defences of my monk. Most of my magic items were defensive and I was a dwarf witch made up for the advantage fighters have with their D10 hit dice.
I was rarely affected by spells and had enough hp and ac to become a shield for the group. I would charge at casters and flank the other opponents with the fighter or the rogue and give him more sneak attacks. I would use the knockdown feat and/or stunning fist to distract and weaken the opponents. The fact that I would be more disconnected from the rest of the group and because of my annoying abilities is why other enemies would be distracted by me while the rest of the party dealt the bulk of the damage.
My monk became the most fun when I became a ninja of the crescent moon. (S&F I believe) The abilities of this prestige class really allowed me to shine. The rogue and I would sneak into combat and the battle would start by us rogues anihlating the most threatening enemy with sneak attacks and opportunist strikes, while our caster nuked the room with an AOE damage spell which both of us would save against.
Also the Ninja calss gave me much greater mobility with the fats sneak ability, fats climb, invisibility, and gaseous form. I almost always found ways to reach out of the way opponents.
Throughout all of this I never was able to out melee a fighter one on one, and I could not match a rogue with its stealth capabilities and other usefull skills. But I was always more than willing to charge into the places the fighter couldnt reach or where it was to dangerous for the spell caster to go. And that is what made it so fun. That was my niche doing everything the other PC's couldn't or wouldn't do.

Aquillion
2007-07-23, 09:53 PM
Monks are third wheel fighter/rogues, like bards are third wheel wizard/cleric/rogues. They are there to add to a group, not replace one of the classic 4.That isn't quite fair to bards. Bards do have a lot of potentally useful abilities and theoretically valuable party roles that no other core class is quite as good at. They have abilities that can support diplomacy better, for instance; sure, your mage can cast charm or dominate, but casting a spell is visible unless you have both still + silent spell, will often be obvious if the victim saves, and may have undesirably obvious effects (e.g. target starts obeying the mage like an automaton--not very subtle.) A bard's songs and spells can, in theory, accomplish things in a more subtle manner, one that is better at augmenting diplomacy instead of trying to replace it entirely. Bards are also supposed to be better at knowledge; they get bardic knowledge, for one.

How well these things actually work depends a lot on the campaign, but it isn't too hard to see something good built around these, elaborating them into a full party role in the right setting.

...Monks, though? Someone here suggested "party grappler"; that just isn't going to work as a role in most campaigns, for the same reason that bards can't exclusively be "language-dependant mind-affecting spellcaster." You can't really grapple with a dragon, Balor, or Black Pudding... too many of the monsters you encounter later on are either too big, too strong, or just plain better than you at grappling. Unless your DM agrees to only send in roughly medium-sized or smaller nonflying creatures of generally normal strength, a grappling build doesn't work... and even if it did, it's a role for a fighter variant, not for a new base class.

Monks should never have been a core base class in the first place. It was done because people kept on asking to play Jackie Chan, so they finally threw up their hands and scrawled in a class; but it never really fit in. Case in point: Shurikens. Totally absurd, but they threw them in because the entire monk class was just a sop to kung-fu movie fanboys anyway.

That's the monk real purpose of the monk class: Keep kung-fu movie fans happy. Trying to needle out anything beyond that is silly... the correct fix for a monk is to take a fighter, rename their greatsword to "fists", and rename their armor "kung-fu skills". Presto, a monk, serving every purpose the class was ever intended to fufill.

Alleine
2007-07-23, 11:40 PM
The monk I'm currently working on building is just going to be an extra melee attacker for now. He's going to get two size bonuses for various things, power points, and a few stunning fist feats that will hopefully have me doing 6d8+3d6 by lvl 20, but I'll be doing the extra 3d6 most of the time before that. What I delight in making my monk do is annoying the heck out of everyone if all else fails.

Everyone seems mostly convinced that the monk is a piece of crap with fists. So? Don't be a big fighter, be something more fun! Be the guy who does more damage with your fists than the fighter with his sword(they don't usually notice your poor aim), faster than the paladin on his mount, more AC than the fighter OR the paladin, more impervious to anything that requires as saving throw than anyone else in the party, and the guy who angers the DM(though you may not want this) by being virtually unable to harm.

Orzel
2007-07-24, 01:15 AM
I tell monk allies to do 1 thing:

Support.

Attack the summons, pets, and other mooks
Flank for the fighter and rogue
Cover the casters
support the sneaky guys on stealth missions
talk to people when the face isn't around

The monk's job is to stand around, not die, and make sure you aren't doing stuff alone.

Leon
2007-07-24, 03:47 AM
I tell monk allies to do 1 thing:

Support.



That how i see the monk, and ive seen it played that way a fair bit - aside from the damm fist of zoeken monks that plagued us in the last campagain

Behold_the_Void
2007-07-24, 04:06 AM
Be an elf. Get a long bow. Prioritize dexterity. Run halfway across the battlefield and pepper things with arrows. In the event of a TPK threat, flee and then come back at night to drag the party back to get ressed.

Xuincherguixe
2007-07-24, 04:11 AM
Make philosophical comments while brutally killing everything with a vast array of martial arts techniques, with questionable names ("Irate Dragons Cancerous Pancreas!" "Sharpen the Pencil!" "Paci-FIST" "Dogs Playing Poker!" "There was no Second Gunman!" "A few too many cats!")

Probably sneak around a bit too. This Monk after all is certainly going to be under 9000.

Bosh
2007-07-24, 04:26 AM
Some of the tactics recommended here resemble bringing a sports car and a hunting rifle to a tank battle. Sure you'll be faster than everyone else and sure you'll probably survive unscathed due to your speed and maneuverability but so ****ing what, you're in the middle of a tank battle and all you've got is a hunting rifle.

Behold_the_Void
2007-07-24, 04:47 AM
Some of the tactics recommended here resemble bringing a sports car and a hunting rifle to a tank battle. Sure you'll be faster than everyone else and sure you'll probably survive unscathed due to your speed and maneuverability but so ****ing what, you're in the middle of a tank battle and all you've got is a hunting rifle.

Well, you're a monk. You bring fists to a sword fight.

mostlyharmful
2007-07-24, 05:02 AM
Your speed means you get to choose when you fight and under what terms, your various attack forms give you a wide variety of options as to what you do against any particular enemy.

The ability to choose a weak spot on your opponent, without them being able to stop you is very tactically valuable. If they really are as ridiculously hard then get a brilliant energy weapon, if they are a horde of enemies take them on one at a time or burn down their wagons/grainstores/ammo-dumps/whatever.

think tactically and have multiple backup plans and you can overcome seemingly massively more powerful opponents.

Dausuul
2007-07-24, 05:33 AM
The swordsage from ToB is pretty much what I think the monk should be--the Batman of melee warriors. The swordsage lacks the hitting power of the warblade or the raw staying power of the crusader, but compensates with versatility, stealth, and mobility.

In terms of party role, swordsages are typically secondary melee fighters (but can function as front-liners if that's what's needed); they zip around the battlefield, pausing now and then to unleash a devastating combo move. They make unparalleled scouts thanks to their short-range teleportation, and they can also be very deadly as assassins. They partner exceptionally well with rogues; the swordsage's mobility lets them set up flanking with ease, and the swordsage's ability to teleport past obstacles complements the rogue's trapfinding and lockpicking talents nicely.

Droodle
2007-07-24, 05:34 AM
A monk actually makes a very good reach fighter if you allow the pole fighter feat from dragon magazine. I'd take a warblade level at level 2 so I can use the feat with any polearm (and the maneuvers won't hurt, either). I'd get leap attack and shock trooper ASAP and would try to PRC into something that gets full BAB....and full initiator level progression if I can get it.

Brother_Franklin
2007-07-24, 06:48 AM
I would give the Monk an autorez similar to ghosts.

Something like. If a monk dies by any other reason other than old age, he appears with full hitpoints at the spot he died (2d20 - classlevel) days later.


Now before you cry munchkin, you can still throw a monk in a volcano or something, so that when he autorezs he just dies agian.

To me this fits for three reasons:
1. The spiritual nature of the class flavor.
2. The hard to kill nature of the class crunch.
3. The monk eventually becomes a native outsider.

It would also be a unique ability that no other class has like bardic knowledge is for the bard.

And it would also be fun to play.

PS and at level 20 remove the possibility of death by old age so that you can have 1000 year old monks locked in immortal combat (over a poem).

Funkyodor
2007-07-24, 06:56 AM
Monks should never have been a core base class in the first place. It was done because people kept on asking to play Jackie Chan, so they finally threw up their hands and scrawled in a class; but it never really fit in. Case in point: Shurikens. Totally absurd, but they threw them in because the entire monk class was just a sop to kung-fu movie fanboys anyway.

That's the monk real purpose of the monk class: Keep kung-fu movie fans happy. Trying to needle out anything beyond that is silly... the correct fix for a monk is to take a fighter, rename their greatsword to "fists", and rename their armor "kung-fu skills". Presto, a monk, serving every purpose the class was ever intended to fufill.

Well, the monk was a core class in 1st Edition AD&D but was removed in 2nd Edition then inserted into 2nd Edition Oriental Adventures. It only makes sense that it would return in 3.0 & 3.5. The things they changed for the better is that in earlier edtions their improved AC bonus replaced their Dexterity bonus and their increased fist damage replaced their Strength bonus to damage. Things I wished they kept was Psionic Invisibility (much more powerfull than 3.5 psionics), Immunity to mind effecting spells/effects, and a +1/2 points of damage per monk level when attacking with weapons.

Anyways, I would probably play a Dwarf Kama wielding tripper. Or maybe a Halfling Quarterstaff wielding disarmer. Having a trip/disarm weapon in hand when going in close is preferred when playing a monk. Or, zipping around with a X-bow/sling sounds cool too.

Leon
2007-07-24, 08:12 AM
Or, zipping around with a X-bow/sling sounds cool too.

i ran a encounter for a party once that pitted them vs a Vampire Monk, the spent most of the fight hanging off the celing sniping at the PCs while they faced the conundrum of the dominated cleric

Indon
2007-07-24, 08:14 AM
If they really are as ridiculously hard then get a brilliant energy weapon, if they are a horde of enemies take them on one at a time or burn down their wagons/grainstores/ammo-dumps/whatever.


You know, Brilliant Energy gauntlets strike me as pretty potent for a monk. Odd I'd not thought of them before.

Fixer
2007-07-24, 09:00 AM
I once designed a monk that I decided to never play. I used the cheese from Vow of Poverty and Vow of Non-Violence/Peace, eventually becoming a Saint.

Abilities were Wis->Cha->Dex->Con->Str->Int
Wisdom bonus to AC, twice (once from Saint, once from Monk).
Massive saving throws.
Damage (from unarmed) was always non-lethal and any weapon that struck him had a chance to break instantly (with bonuses to DC from Saint).
30-foot radius of peace meant most combats stopped very quickly after they started (with bonuses to DC from Saint).
Focused in Tripping/Disarming/Grappling for regular feat trees. Used bonus Exalted feats for nimbus & similar Diplomacy-based bonuses.
Skill points in Diplomacy allowed for a Diplomancer approach and Jump/Move Silent/Hide to move among opponents allowing Aura of Peace to prevent attacks on allies without being seen.

The reason I decided not to play him was because the aura of peace would have affected his companions as well and that could be very bad in a fight. My friends never play pacifistic characters and would chaff every time they wanted to start a fight. Still a very viable build.

Dausuul
2007-07-24, 09:01 AM
I would give the Monk an autorez similar to ghosts.

Something like. If a monk dies by any other reason other than old age, he appears with full hitpoints at the spot he died (2d20 - classlevel) days later.


Now before you cry munchkin, you can still throw a monk in a volcano or something, so that when he autorezs he just dies agian.

So... what's the point?

Monks are already fairly tough to kill, at least for a non-caster. Their problem is they don't do anything else. It's not much comfort to the rest of your slaughtered party that you survived... better if you could contribute something to winning the fight in the first place.

Of course, if you grant this ability at level 1, then monk will become the most popular dip class ever.

Jerthanis
2007-07-24, 09:45 AM
So... what's the point?

Monks are already fairly tough to kill, at least for a non-caster.

I'd say Monks are still harder for casters to kill than fighter types (which is saying something, it's kind of pathetic how bad monks are at their main thing, melee combat), because until the monk can absofreakin'lutely max out their magic items at level 16 or so, their overall AC, HP and attack bonus is going to be way lower than a comparably leveled fighter, paladin or barbarian. And no matter how you slice it, it's going to be difficult for the Wizard/Sorcerer to get past his saves, and even if you devote a goodly portion of spells to save-less affects, most of the best just slow the monk down so the fighter can whack the monk.

The times I've played monks, my bane was melee combat with people who did melee combat as their profession, and I did pretty well against everyone else.

If the Monk were to gain a sort of pounce-like ability, it might also help them, since their core ability relies on full attacking, and you can't utilize full attacks while also utilizing a high move-speed.

(edited for off topic rambling)

Brother_Franklin
2007-07-24, 10:24 AM
What's the point?

There is a big differance between a TPK and a massive defeat where one person lives. A TPK is often game ending. So it would give the monk something that the other party members can apreciate him for- either getting everyone a rez or at least letting the mission the plot continue. Addmitingly, their are other mccgufins you could use to acheive this (so and so's brother wants to avenge his death), but having a salwart undying monk could be a cool way to do this.

Also, its percisely because its already in the Monk mileu that its a good idea. For those who like play the Monk with all the saves and the AC, it would suck to suddenly decide to make the Monk a fighter or a mage. Whatever the solution is to the monk's weakness it should be Monkish.

The monk could also then take on absurdly dangerous assignments. For example, a peace-loving good monk could try to talk the BBEG out of his plans with diplomacy. Or the monk could stand on the moral high-ground with the best paladin and flip a greater deamon the bird at level 3.

Oh yeah, it would be better to put the ability at level 2 its not really worth a two level dip unless you can benefit from the monks other abilities.

Mostly, I can just imagine sitting around the basement why all the players listen carefully to the monks daring escapefrom a dungeon with only a bag holding the regurgitated apendages- the hole campagin riding on weather he can get out and un-TPK the party.

Dausuul
2007-07-24, 12:26 PM
I'd say Monks are still harder for casters to kill than fighter types (which is saying something, it's kind of pathetic how bad monks are at their main thing, melee combat)...

My mistake, should have clarified. Monks are hard to kill, for being a non-caster class.


What's the point?

There is a big differance between a TPK and a massive defeat where one person lives. A TPK is often game ending. So it would give the monk something that the other party members can apreciate him for- either getting everyone a rez or at least letting the mission the plot continue. Addmitingly, their are other mccgufins you could use to acheive this (so and so's brother wants to avenge his death), but having a salwart undying monk could be a cool way to do this.

So you're proposing that the monk's entire raison d'etre should be... TPK insurance? The monk only gets to shine when the rest of the party is dead?

Sorry, I'm not seeing it.

Alleine
2007-07-24, 12:48 PM
If you want something for the monk to do in general, tell him to try and give spiritual advice to the low int barbarian as the barbarian cleaves people in two.

Aquillion
2007-07-24, 02:49 PM
The cleric already had that job covered, though.

Rejakor
2007-07-24, 03:17 PM
You want to know what a monk does? Hmm? Well, i'll tell you. Monks can do things other players can't. Just simply would not be able to do. I had a player that played a monk, he's barely played anything else. I remember the time he stepped into my death-room. The room that I had designed pretty much to kill anyone who stepped into it without dis-engaging the traps. So, the monk strolls in, grabs the artifact as the iron dragon heads are extending from the walls, and then makes ALL his saves, completely avoiding the damage that a few turns later literally melts the room. That is what the Monk is for. Going in, up, around, and through stuff other players simply can't. The fort save that stops the rogue the monk bounces through, the attack rolls that skewer the sorceror the monk blocks if not throws back, the ref save that stymies the fighter the monk leaps through, makes his jump, tumble and balance checks, stuns the caster, trips the musclebound barbarian off the edge, and then bows to his fallen foes. That is what a freakin' monk does.

If you want to be a freaking awesome paragon of unstoppable leetness, play a monk. Theres something about leaping into a room, kicking two arrows out of the air, catching the third and throwing it back so hard it skewers the archer and he drops from the battlements without a sound, that is awesome. There is something about a spellcaster throwing spell after spell at you, and you warding it off and keeping on coming, unstoppable. There is something about standing in a circle of flashing steel and warding all the blades away from you, using perfect timing to avoid every cutting edge.

And I don't believe the monk is a pigeonholed class. I think the monk is a ninja. The rogue is the cunning fox, the second story man, the alleybasher, the flashing wit with the rapier, the grinning scoundrel with a sparkle in his eye and a dagger in his hand. The Monk is the ninja, the watcher of the unseen tides, the holy warrior, the wandering scholar, the minstrel who at night dons the black mask and avenges the smallfolk of an unjust lord.

So, what would I do with a monk? Lots of things. Awesome, fun, bat**** crazy insane things. :smallcool:

ZeroNumerous
2007-07-24, 04:03 PM
completely avoiding the damage that a few turns later literally melts the room.

Energy Resistance: Fire. A wizard does the same thing, but he doesn't need to make a save.


The fort save that stops the rogue the monk bounces through, the attack rolls that skewer the sorceror the monk blocks if not throws back, the ref save that stymies the fighter the monk leaps through, makes his jump, tumble and balance checks, stuns the caster, trips the musclebound barbarian off the edge, and then bows to his fallen foes. That is what a freakin' monk does.

Entangle stops Monk mobility. A wolf animal companion can out-trip the Monk. The Druid himself can wild-shape into hydra and eat the monk in one-round.


If you want to be a freaking awesome paragon of unstoppable leetness, play a monk.

Only if everyone else is a monk.


There is something about a spellcaster throwing spell after spell at you, and you warding it off and keeping on coming, unstoppable.

Evard's Black Tentacles. Monk just got stopped and stopped hard.


There is something about standing in a circle of flashing steel and warding all the blades away from you, using perfect timing to avoid every cutting edge.

Any full-BAB character is going to hit the Monk at any reasonable level.


The Monk is the ninja, the watcher of the unseen tides, the holy warrior, the wandering scholar, the minstrel who at night dons the black mask and avenges the smallfolk of an unjust lord.

That'd be pretty cool if the monk could do any of those things.


And no matter how you slice it, it's going to be difficult for the Wizard/Sorcerer to get past his saves, and even if you devote a goodly portion of spells to save-less affects, most of the best just slow the monk down so the fighter can whack the monk.

Again, Evard's Black Tentacles. Monk is stopped. No, he doesn't get a save. He just gets grappled to the ground and crushed to death.

Seriously, when the complete and entire point of your class is halted by one fourth level spell, then you're in the wrong class.

Telonius
2007-07-24, 04:10 PM
To be fair, every class that doesn't have access to "Freedom of Movement," or some form of flying, gets trampled to death as well. The fighter, barbarian, rogue, and ranger are just as screwed as the monk where black tentacles are concerned (barbarian slightly less so because of DR).

Arbitrarity
2007-07-24, 04:11 PM
Not so much, as they have full BAB. Now, on the other hand, Crushing Fist kills everything without freedom of movement.

ravenkith
2007-07-24, 04:33 PM
The ultimate monk is one that combines the drunken master's ability to turn anything into a weapon that deals damage equivalent to your unarmed attack with the Master Thrower's tricks. Can theoretically be made even more powerful by combining it with the ascetic rogue feat...and the corresponding levels in rogue.

Conveniently, coins come in several denominations, from the cheap (copper), to damage reduction penetrating (silver & gold)

Especially potent with custom built coinage, such as adamantine pieces...

Can be used in conjunction with alchemic flasks for even more benefits (although at greater cost, and less effect as you level up)...and allows you to use your flurry of blows ability to fuel your ranged attacks...as well as your stunning fist.

At least in theory, and if your dm will allow you to spec out in 'improvised weapon' for entry into MT.

bloodstorm blade kind of renders this moot (as levels in that prestige class are aguably much better than levels in MT and Rogue.

lord_khaine
2007-07-24, 05:04 PM
actualy improved grapple leaves the monk with 1 less grapple bonus compared to a full bab class at lv 20, and he will have more tries to get lose.
not to mention, most casters are just as screwed when the monk starts the grapple, before the tentakle spell is cast. (the exception here being a higher lv druid, though that comparison is hardly fair)

Dausuul
2007-07-24, 05:16 PM
actualy improved grapple leaves the monk with 1 less grapple bonus compared to a full bab class at lv 20, and he will have more tries to get lose.

That assumes the monk's Strength is equal to the fighter's. This is very unlikely to be the case, given that monks need four stats (Str, Dex, Con, Wis) where fighters need just two (Str and Con).

It also assumes the fighter hasn't picked up Improved Grapple as well. Given how fast fighters run out of worthwhile feats, that would not be at all surprising.


not to mention, most casters are just as screwed when the monk starts the grapple, before the tentakle spell is cast. (the exception here being a higher lv druid, though that comparison is hardly fair)

Wizards and sorcs just cast dimension door. No somatic component, you can cast it while grappled. The druid can have her animal companion shred the monk while the monk is denied his Dex bonus to AC due to grappling. Not sure offhand what the cleric does if grappled unexpectedly.

Jerthanis
2007-07-24, 05:32 PM
My mistake, should have clarified. Monks are hard to kill, for being a non-caster class.



RIGHT! That makes sense. Fighter types murder the heck out of Monks. Casters murder the heck out of monks, but not as well as casters murder the heck out of fighter types. I misread what you meant, but understand now.




Wizards and sorcs just cast dimension door. No somatic component, you can cast it while grappled. The druid can have her animal companion shred the monk while the monk is denied his Dex bonus to AC due to grappling. Not sure offhand what the cleric does if grappled unexpectedly.

The ONE way to avoid this problem is to get that one Tactical feat out of the Complete Warrior that lets you full attack after teleporting to Abundant Step up to the wizard for a flurry of grapple attempts to pin the Wizard inside of one round. If you can pin them, you can stop them from talking at your option. This won't account for use of Metamagic rods of Silent Spell, or the wizard having a copy of the spell prepared as silent.

Skjaldbakka
2007-07-24, 05:44 PM
This is very unlikely to be the case, given that monks need four stats (Str, Dex, Con, Wis) where fighters need just two (Str and Con).

Monk's don't have to be MAD. They really just need a 13 str for power attack (or use the variant monk from UA, and then you don't need more than a 10 str.). Take Intuitive strike on top of that, and the monk needs wis and con. Doesn't even need dex, really.

18 wis, +5 wish/tomes, +5 level, +6 item (36wis, +13 wis mod).

The monk gets +4 bonus from class, then +13 from wisdom, giving him a +17 insight bonus, which is better than +5 full plate, and applies to touch. You can then benefit from +8 bracers of armor, putting you at a +25 AC, which is better than +5 full plate and +5 shield (+21 from those). Having Dex is just icing on the cake. Although higher str would be tastier icing.


I'm not saying monk doesn't need work(or that swordsage isn't better), but that monk is MAD is a misconception. It just needs wisdom for to-hit and AC, and Con for HP.

One could even say that monks are SAD. :smallsmile:

BardicDuelist
2007-07-24, 05:55 PM
Since this seems to fit this thread:
What about taking a level or two of monk, then rogue and giving ambush feats. Would that actually be effective, or no? You could do ability drain, save or x, etc.

Gavin Sage
2007-07-24, 06:27 PM
Playing a Monk: Win Initiative then attack a caster with Stunning Fist. Its like attacking with Hold Person that does damage too. Good for getting that full attack the next round, and use it then too. Also good for letting a Rogue sneak or a Fighter get their full attack. And if you don't win initiative then you still have formidable defenses against magic that don't need time to be put on, run out, or can get dispelled.

Skjaldbakka
2007-07-24, 06:40 PM
Playing a Monk: Win Initiative

... and hope they don't have celerity spells. Who thought those were a good idea?!

Droodle
2007-07-24, 07:45 PM
Playing a Monk: Win InitiativeIf your monk is winning initiative, he's either squishy from a low con, weak, or has difficulty making his stunning fist stick from a low wis. An optimized monk is probably not going to be winning initiative very often.

Indon
2007-07-24, 07:58 PM
... and hope they don't have celerity spells. Who thought those were a good idea?!

Because Celerity can not be used to win initiative unless it is used in conjunction with another spell, Foresight.

MeklorIlavator
2007-07-24, 08:06 PM
If your monk is winning initiative, he's either squishy from a low con, weak, or has difficulty making his stunning fist stick from a low wis. An optimized monk is probably not going to be winning initiative very often.

Actually, there is a weapon enchantment that can add 5 to your initiative, Coupled with Improved Initiative makes a total of 9 before dexterity, so its possible for a low dex monk to win initiative. Its Just expensive.

Alleine
2007-07-24, 08:23 PM
This thread has devolved into yet another frothing-mad argument about monks. I suggest we start telling the OP what he CAN do with a monk and not "OMGZ monks are t3h suxxor" (My sincerest apologies to anyone this offends, which should be everyone, hell, I'm offended by it! It isn't meant to mock you, but to show what this is at its barest, worst essentials)

Please, for the love of anything, leave the poor dead animal alone!


*ahem* You could make a monk the face of the group with a few exalted feats, and he could be the one guy in the party who isn't hell-bent on killing everything. Vow of Peace and whatnot.

ForzaFiori
2007-07-24, 08:36 PM
monks are the ultimate support charcter.
they can tumble behind the enemy, giving a flanking bonus to the front line fighters. they can scout w/ the rogue, and take out enemy casters. they can hang back and keep things from getting to your casters.
they are the ultimate 5th character.

although, the class would be much more realistic (not to mention just plain better) if they gave it full BAB, as it is based of a martial artist, who is JUST AS GOOD at attacking as any fighter.

Hadrian_Emrys
2007-07-24, 08:56 PM
Hell, give monks the option of unarmed attacks bypassing armor as touch attacks or catching opponents flat footed like... you know, martial artists.

Gavin Sage
2007-07-24, 09:08 PM
If your monk is winning initiative, he's either squishy from a low con, weak, or has difficulty making his stunning fist stick from a low wis. An optimized monk is probably not going to be winning initiative very often.

Why are you sacking dex? I mean Con isn't going to be something you want a penalty on but I'll take the iniative and AC (plus some skills) over it any day. It isn't a primary stat sure, but then is it for anyone but rogues? Monks do have tough choices with their stats yes, but Con isn't one of them as far as I'm concerned.

calebcom
2007-07-24, 10:33 PM
Freezing the Life Blood. save vs paralization

Do no damage, but fort save or lose. can do a number of times per day equal to your stunning fist uses.



Monk sneaks up within charge of the enemy caster, darts forward and paralizes the enemy caster with this feat.

arnoldrew
2007-07-24, 11:02 PM
Of course, the question remains that if a kick to the stomach makes you nauseated, why does a sword to the stomach let you full-attack next round?

A sword to the stomach probably deals enough damage to put you at 0 hit points.

Hadrian_Emrys
2007-07-24, 11:49 PM
A master kickboxer's straight knee can impact with enough force to equate to a car going around 30-40 mph and with all that damage focused on a single point of impact. What's your sword point?

Reality?
This...
is...
Deeandee! *kick* :smalltongue:

Hunter Noventa
2007-07-25, 04:15 AM
Don't forget about Zen Archery from CW, making you even more Wis-Based, especially for an elven monk.

ZeroNumerous
2007-07-25, 04:29 AM
Because thats all blunt-force. It'll knock him out, sure, but the pointy-end going into the squishy parts equates to death.

Alleine: You could, but the Rogue(or any dedicated Diplomancer) will do much, much better. And can even take a page from the Monk's book and use Vow of Peace and Non-Violence.

Honestly, when you're playing a monk, your best choice is to go assault the king, let his guards kill you, and then roll up a better character.

lord_khaine
2007-07-25, 04:46 AM
Wizards and sorcs just cast dimension door. No somatic component, you can cast it while grappled. The druid can have her animal companion shred the monk while the monk is denied his Dex bonus to AC due to grappling. Not sure offhand what the cleric does if grappled unexpectedly
the trick here is called mage slayer, and prevents people from casting defensively.
the druid on the other hand can just wildshape into something big and nasty, but really, what melee noncaster class does have a chance against a druid?

oh btw, dont listen to ZeroNumerous, its a trap :smalltongue:

Bosh
2007-07-25, 06:14 AM
Your speed means you get to choose when you fight and under what terms, your various attack forms give you a wide variety of options as to what you do against any particular enemy.

The ability to choose a weak spot on your opponent, without them being able to stop you is very tactically valuable. If they really are as ridiculously hard then get a brilliant energy weapon, if they are a horde of enemies take them on one at a time or burn down their wagons/grainstores/ammo-dumps/whatever.

think tactically and have multiple backup plans and you can overcome seemingly massively more powerful opponents.

The problem is that most of that doesn't work unless the rest of the party can do the same stuff. If you have a monk and a tin can and the monk dodges out of range of the enemy then the tin can just gets mobbed and by the time the monk has time to go through all of his backup plans the rest of the party is dead.

Monks are good at not getting killed but that only contributes to the group if:
-The rest of the group is also hard to kill.
-You have some kind of MMORPG-style taunt ability.
-You can get in between enemies and your friends and get in the way.

None of which monks are terribly good at.

It doesn't matter how good you are at not getting killed if the enemy can just ignore you and kill all of your friends.


If you want to be a freaking awesome paragon of unstoppable leetness, play a monk.
:smalltongue: You're a funny man.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-25, 06:44 AM
the trick here is called mage slayer, and prevents people from casting defensively.
the druid on the other hand can just wildshape into something big and nasty, but really, what melee noncaster class does have a chance against a druid?

oh btw, dont listen to ZeroNumerous, its a trap :smalltongue:

That does jack squat when grappling. You can't make AOO's, you can't threaten. Furthermore, casting in grapple isn't defensive.

Dausuul
2007-07-25, 07:18 AM
This thread has devolved into yet another frothing-mad argument about monks. I suggest we start telling the OP what he CAN do with a monk and not "OMGZ monks are t3h suxxor" (My sincerest apologies to anyone this offends, which should be everyone, hell, I'm offended by it! It isn't meant to mock you, but to show what this is at its barest, worst essentials)

Please, for the love of anything, leave the poor dead animal alone!

Fair enough, although I'm not quite clear on what he meant by the original statement "assume monks are effective." If I'm assuming monks are effective, what am I assuming makes them so?

But okay, say somebody is in fact playing a monk... the obvious role is scout. They're just as sneaky as rogues, and they're faster and harder to kill, so the odds of them being able to make it back to the party and report are considerably better. In a trap-filled dungeon with lots of locked doors, the rogue is better at scouting, but in most other environments the monk wins. At least until the casters get access to enough divination spells to make the whole issue moot.

Alternatively, the monk and rogue can go on stealth missions together, thus providing backup in case one of them gets into trouble.

In combat, the monk can annoy enemy casters. If the casters are poorly optimized or use bad tactics (which is actually a very common situation if the DM is not a caster-maniac like yours truly), the monk can even kill enemy casters.

So: Invest in Wis, Dex, Con, and Str in that order. Get Stunning Fist for something to do in a fight. Play a human for the extra skill points and max out Hide, Move Silently, Spot, and Listen.

Also consider PRCing into kensai, which allows you to turn your fists into magic weapons, thus addressing one of the monk's key weaknesses.

Indon
2007-07-25, 09:28 AM
That does jack squat when grappling. You can't make AOO's, you can't threaten. Furthermore, casting in grapple isn't defensive.

Grapplers are not considered flat-footed in regards to others in their grapple. Thus, they threaten the person they're grappling.

Also, A Monk can use Empty Body to become incorporeal, and thus escape a grapple from anything that isn't some sort of exotic force-creature. Of course, Empty Body is obtained awfully late in the level progression.

Dausuul
2007-07-25, 09:39 AM
Grapplers are not considered flat-footed in regards to others in their grapple. Thus, they threaten the person they're grappling.

Also, A Monk can use Empty Body to become incorporeal, and thus escape a grapple from anything that isn't some sort of exotic force-creature. Of course, Empty Body is obtained awfully late in the level progression.

From the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple):


No Threatened Squares
You don’t threaten any squares while grappling.


It has nothing to do with being flat-footed--in fact, you're not considered flat-footed to anyone, you just lose your Dex bonus. While grappling, you do not threaten, period.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-25, 09:40 AM
You don't threaten any squares, as in the text. Doesn't matter that you keep dexterity bonus to AC. Without any threatened squares, you can't AOO anything at all. I mean come on, it doesn't even say you threaten your own square, or at least your opponent!

EDIT: Apparently I'm stupid, as it says you threaten your opponent in grapple. Stupid grapple rules.

Nope, NVM, I just read a quote of your post, and thought it was from the SRD.

Telonius
2007-07-25, 10:07 AM
Escape Artist is a class skill for Monks, so they're not necessarily any worse off than a full BAB fighter in terms of escaping Tentacles. A monk might actually be a little bit better off, in certain circumstances. (It's also a class skill for Rogues, which is why I included them as being at the same level of screwed-ness as fighters and monks).

Alleine
2007-07-25, 11:41 AM
Its really up to how the game is being played out and what the other characters are. Because once you choose one path for a monk, its kinda hard to change it.

Monks can act as *support for almost anyone, but keep in mind, it is only support. Monks are a fun extra character, my first character was a monk, mainly because the party already had a druid, cleric, fighter, paladin and rogue. All the main roles were filled, and monks are easily the easiest to play, IMO.


*This means they are moderately capable of accomplishing the task, not that they are the best, but they are better than those who focus on one thing, like casters(not including druids).

Gavin Sage
2007-07-26, 12:34 AM
... and hope they don't have celerity spells. Who thought those were a good idea?!

Celerity has been bugging me for awhile so I did some research. However I'll say its not as broken as people tend to think in my opinion. Mitigating factors:

1. Immediate actions cannot be used flat-footed, therefore cannot be used until your first turn.
2. Immediates count as your Swift, thus no Quickened combos of doom.
3. You loose your next turn thanks to being dazed.

For a Monk this means you can use charging-stun on your first turn without fear with winning initiative. And more to generally limits someone to one spell only while giving enemies a round to counter it. Still a useful spell but its not something to go into without care.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-26, 11:07 AM
Celerity has been bugging me for awhile so I did some research. However I'll say its not as broken as people tend to think in my opinion. Mitigating factors:

1. Immediate actions cannot be used flat-footed, therefore cannot be used until your first turn.
2. Immediates count as your Swift, thus no Quickened combos of doom.
3. You loose your next turn thanks to being dazed.

For a Monk this means you can use charging-stun on your first turn without fear with winning initiative. And more to generally limits someone to one spell only while giving enemies a round to counter it. Still a useful spell but its not something to go into without care.

Problem is at level 18 or so. (foresight (many slots, keep it on all day), celerity, time stop)

BrokenButterfly
2007-07-26, 08:10 PM
Well I only played one monk, who was allowed to be Chaotic Evil. She just ran around as a wannabe Angel of Death, and killed many a homeless guy in the city.

After an excellent adventure involving a religious civil war, Mitsuko Uotani ended up being the only character alive in the party, and thanks to a hilarious batch of misunderstandings ended up being knighted for her trouble. So I retired this Angel of Death now universally adored by the population of a large city.

I just played a vanilla monk like a normal fighter character and she won through (all of my characters so far in my RPG career have done...except for one bard....*shudder*).

Matthew
2007-07-27, 10:36 PM
Well, the monk was a core class in 1st Edition AD&D but was removed in 2nd Edition then inserted into 2nd Edition Oriental Adventures. It only makes sense that it would return in 3.0 & 3.5. The things they changed for the better is that in earlier edtions their improved AC bonus replaced their Dexterity bonus and their increased fist damage replaced their Strength bonus to damage. Things I wished they kept was Psionic Invisibility (much more powerfull than 3.5 psionics), Immunity to mind effecting spells/effects, and a +1/2 points of damage per monk level when attacking with weapons.

Getting your version history mixed up there. Monk was indeed a Core Class in 1e, though it was singled out in the PHB as 'unusual'. Oriental Adventures was a 1e release and was supposed to put the Monk into a more intuitive context (according to the book itself). The Monk was cut from the 2e PHB for pretty much the same reason. It turned up in 2e as a Kit in the Complete Priest's Handbook and then as a Sub Class of Priest in Player's Option: Spells and Magic. However, even though Oriental Adventures was a 1e Sourcebook, it was used and referenced for several 2e Oriental Adventures Modules and Settings.

As for what I think should be done for Monks, I think they should be a much more modular Base Class, making use of Bonus Monk Feats, rather than set Class Features. Full BAB wouldn't hurt either.