My Monk Build

[tstewt1921]

So I know I made a thread asking advice but here is my monk gestalt build so far.

Fighter 8/Monk 8

Stats are as follow (before magic items)

Str:16, Dex:16, Con:12, Int: 14, Wis: 16, Cha: 10.

Feats: In no order specific order

Improved Grapple, Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes (Monk Bonus)
Dodge, Mobility, Able Learner
Weapon Focus/Weapon Specialization (Glaive)
Pole Fighting (DR 331 pg. 28)
Shorten Grip (DR 331 pg. 28)
Weapon Finesse
Weapon Mastery (Slashing)
Hold the Line
Opportunistic Tactician (Slow Flaw)

Basically my Monk will be using his Glaive for his flurry of blows. And being all about attacking anytime anyone does anything, I do plan on taking Back Stab or whatever it's called to where if someone doesn't attack me and I threaten them I get an AoO.

Before magic items and what not I will have a +11/+11/+6 on my flurry if I'm not using my shortened grip.

Let me know if you have any further suggestions of feats, PrCs, magic items (29k to buy and I haven't bought yet) or any changes I should make, I would really appreciate it!

Hope you like it so far :)

[Gruftzwerg]

how do you flurry with a glaive? not a regular monk weapon.

I mean, there are ways for that, but I don't see any in your build.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Hmmm. I'd recommend picking up a guisarme over a glaive, because it allows you to use Improved Trip. Dodge, Mobility, and Improved Grapple aren't that useful, and neither is Weapon Specialization. You don't need Short Haft because you have Improved Unarmed Strike, so you can just use unarmed attacks if you want to AoO nearby creatures. Weapon Finesse is doing practically nothing in your build.


Tashalatora would be a good feat to pick up. It allows you to stack a psionic class and monk for the purpose of flurry/AC bonus/unarmed damage. And, of course, Decisive Strike is a great monk ACF for a tripper, ask your DM if it qualifies for Pole Master and works with Tashalatora (it really should, it's a Flurry of Blows replacer, after all).


I'd build a basic fighter/monk tripper like so:

levels: fighter 8//monk 2/psychic warrior 6
monk: Decisive Strike ACF (replaces Flurry of Blows)
feats: Pole Master1, Weapon Focus (guisarme)fighter 1, Improved Unarmed Strikemonk 1, Monastic Training (psychic warrior)monk 1, Combat Reflexesmonk 2, Combat Expertisefighter 2, Tashalatora3, Improved Trippsychic warrior 1.

Leaves you with feats at fighter 4, 6, 8, and psywar 2, 5, and your level 6 feat. For psywar feats, I'd pick up Psionic Weapon and Deep Impact, allowing you to make Decisive Strike touch attacks.

If you want a bit more oomph, replace some of the later fighter levels with Crusader, and pick up Thicket of Blades.

[tstewt1921]

how do you flurry with a glaive? not a regular monk weapon.

I mean, there are ways for that, but I don't see any in your build.


The Pole Fighting feat allows me to use flurry of blows with a polearm weapon.

[tstewt1921]

Hmmm. I'd recommend picking up a guisarme over a glaive, because it allows you to use Improved Trip. Dodge, Mobility, and Improved Grapple aren't that useful, and neither is Weapon Specialization. You don't need Short Haft because you have Improved Unarmed Strike, so you can just use unarmed attacks if you want to AoO nearby creatures. Weapon Finesse is doing practically nothing in your build.


Tashalatora would be a good feat to pick up. It allows you to stack a psionic class and monk for the purpose of flurry/AC bonus/unarmed damage. And, of course, Decisive Strike is a great monk ACF for a tripper, ask your DM if it qualifies for Pole Master and works with Tashalatora (it really should, it's a Flurry of Blows replacer, after all).


I'd build a basic fighter/monk tripper like so:

levels: fighter 8//monk 2/psychic warrior 6
monk: Decisive Strike ACF (replaces Flurry of Blows)
feats: Pole Master1, Weapon Focus (guisarme)fighter 1, Improved Unarmed Strikemonk 1, Monastic Training (psychic warrior)monk 1, Combat Reflexesmonk 2, Combat Expertisefighter 2, Tashalatora3, Improved Trippsychic warrior 1.

Leaves you with feats at fighter 4, 6, 8, and psywar 2, 5, and your level 6 feat. For psywar feats, I'd pick up Psionic Weapon and Deep Impact, allowing you to make Decisive Strike touch attacks.

If you want a bit more oomph, replace some of the later fighter levels with Crusader, and pick up Thicket of Blades.



So, can you explain out a bit more on decisive strike, basically at level 11 I will be doing 1/2 hits a round always doing double damage?

Dodge, Mobility and Weap Specializtion are requirements I needed for a couple of my feats.

Also, what is your preference to Guirasarme over the Glaive? Is it due to not having to have improved trip as a feat or is it something else?

[Gruftzwerg]

The Pole Fighting feat allows me to use flurry of blows with a polearm weapon.

Ah you mean "Pole Fighter" feat^^, k.

decisive strike ACF for monk:
is a full-round-action in which you do a single (!) attack with a -2 hit penalty. If the attack hits it deals double dmg. The double dmg bonus counts till the start of your next turn (extra attacks from other sources + AoO !). This ACF works best in AoO builds combined with Karmic Strike/Roland's Gambit. You give up your extra attacks from high BAB, but your attacks will do double dmg. If you build for it, it can work nice.
e.g. to combo it with "improved Trip". If you trip your target with your single attack, you immediately get a free trip attack for double dmg.

Decisive Strikes has its ups and downs, but if you build for it, it's ok.

[tstewt1921]

Ah you mean "Pole Fighter" feat^^, k.

decisive strike ACF for monk:
is a full-round-action in which you do a single (!) attack with a -2 hit penalty. If the attack hits it deals double dmg. The double dmg bonus counts till the start of your next turn (extra attacks from other sources + AoO !). This ACF works best in AoO builds combined with Karmic Strike/Roland's Gambit. You give up your extra attacks from high BAB, but your attacks will do double dmg. If you build for it, it can work nice.
e.g. to combo it with "improved Trip". If you trip your target with your single attack, you immediately get a free trip attack for double dmg.

Decisive Strikes has its ups and downs, but if you build for it, it's ok.

So when you say attacks from other sources, aside from AoO, you are talking about haste and other things to that extent right? Because, even if I have 2 attacks which I do at this level I'm still only making one attack.

[Darrin]

So when you say attacks from other sources, aside from AoO, you are talking about haste and other things to that extent right? Because, even if I have 2 attacks which I do at this level I'm still only making one attack.

I don't think Decisive Strike works with extra attacks from haste. It's a full-round action to make a single melee attack. The strategy is to make a bunch of attacks after your turn is over via Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit. For every enemy that attacks you, you get at least one attack, or two attacks if they hit you.

Since you've got Fighter on the other side, you could do a Jack B. Quick (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=17031211&postcount=30) build over there, and get six attacks for every time they hit you. Jack gets two attacks per AoO via Double Hit (Miniatures HB). If he hits with both sword and axe, he gets a free trip via High-Sword-Low-Axe Style, and Improved Trip gives him a third attack. If an opponent attacks and hits Jack, this triggers two AoOs, which generates six possible attacks.

[ExLibrisMortis]

So, can you explain out a bit more on decisive strike, basically at level 11 I will be doing 1/2 hits a round always doing double damage?

Dodge, Mobility and Weap Specializtion are requirements I needed for a couple of my feats.

Also, what is your preference to Guirasarme over the Glaive? Is it due to not having to have improved trip as a feat or is it something else?
Guisarmes allow you to make trip attacks with the weapon, glaives do not--you must use an unarmed attack to trip if you wield a glaive, so you lose reach. Simple as that.

Decisive Strike is one attack at double damage (two at level 11), which is nice enough, but it doubles the damage on all your Attacks of Opportunity (and you can get a lot of them), plus any extra actions you can find for yourself. Psychic warrior manifesting can get you some fun tricks, such as hustle Linked synchronicity, which allow you to 'wind up' to several actions in a round (a belt of battle works really well, too). Tome of Battle has other options for bonus attacks (OO), including Snap Kick (extra attack doesn't have reach), Defensive Rebuke, Thicket of Blades, Scything Blade, Clarion Call (last two are high-level, IL 13+). As an example, round 1 h L s followed by round 2 bob would get you Decisive Strike > full attack > single regular attack, without impacting round 1 damage, as it only takes a swift to set up. Even better if you grab Twin Power later, but that takes a lot more pp.

Dodge and Mobility are prerequisites to Opportunistic Tactician, which is a nice feat, but I don't think it's worth three (two prerequisites + itself)... maybe with Midnight Dodge and combined with the build in my signature, but that'd get pretty different (great in gestalt, though). Weapon Specialization is a prereq to Melee Weapon Mastery, for Slashing Flurry (I presume), but I recommend switching over to AoO-provoking and using Decisive Strike, dropping WS and MWM.

If you want a bit more tactical play with AoOs, I recommend the Stormguard Warrior tactical feat, from Tome of Battle.

[tstewt1921]

So any ideas on items that I should get with this kind of build?

[TotallyNotEvil]

Are those stats ser in stone? Swapping out DEX and CON would do you a world of good.

Superior Unarmed Fighting and Improved Natural Weapon are good ways to pump your pimp slap.

[Gruftzwerg]

Are those stats ser in stone? Swapping out DEX and CON would do you a world of good.

Superior Unarmed Fighting and Improved Natural Weapon are good ways to pump your pimp slap.

why should he start to invest into unarmed if his intention is to wield a Guisarmes/Glaive?

Further SUS and Improved Natural Attack are aren't worth the feat investment.
- SUS gets overshadowed by a Monk's Belt (they don't stack and Monk's Belt offers more than SUS)
- INA gets overshadowed by "Sizing" weapon enchantment (on a necklace of Natural Attacks). While INA only gives 1 step size increase, sizing lets you choose up to colossal size.

As you see, even if he wanted to pimp his unarmed strike dmg, what isn't the intention here, there would be more efficient ways to do that. Feats are precious and can be used better for stuff you can't buy.

[tstewt1921]

Are those stats ser in stone? Swapping out DEX and CON would do you a world of good.

Superior Unarmed Fighting and Improved Natural Weapon are good ways to pump your pimp slap.

The stats aren't set in stone. However I'm keeping Dex high as I will need for my AoO build that I'm doing. Final stats read as 20/20/14/14/16/10. That's with magic items.

[emeraldstreak]

- INA gets overshadowed by "Sizing" weapon enchantment (on a necklace of Natural Attacks). While INA only gives 1 step size increase, sizing lets you choose up to colossal size.

INA doesn't give a size increase, it's just calculated as one (and stacks with any size increase).

[Gruftzwerg]

INA doesn't give a size increase, it's just calculated as one (and stacks with any size increase).

It stacks until you hit colossal (dmg, not size) and ends there. And Sizing could have done it alone... thats what I meant with "don't stack". And no, colossal+ ain't available for regular PCs (unless you happen to be a dragon with virtual size..). A feat just to compensate a single step of -2 to hit penalty it is eliminating at the end is overkill.

[emeraldstreak]

It stacks until you hit colossal (dmg, not size) and ends there. And Sizing could have done it alone... thats what I meant with "don't stack". And no, colossal+ ain't available for regular PCs (unless you happen to be a dragon with virtual size..). A feat just to compensate a single step of -2 to hit penalty it is eliminating at the end is overkill.

As INA is not a size increase (read the feat), it stacks with Colossal.

[Gruftzwerg]

As INA is not a size increase (read the feat), it stacks with Colossal.

It would stack if there would be a "defined" dmg category behind colossal. But there isn't (unless the "specific rule" for special dragons with virtual sizes. but that ain't the case here).
The regular dmg values for weapons/NA ends at colossal. INA won't change that there ain't a category and no value behind colossal.
In the end INA will remain useless (compensating only a -2 to hit) for any decent optimized PC. While it is nice/ok for monsters and NPCs, PC should stay away from it.

[emeraldstreak]

It would stack if there would be a "defined" dmg category behind colossal. But there isn't (unless the "specific rule" for special dragons with virtual sizes. but that ain't the case here).
The regular dmg values for weapons/NA ends at colossal. INA won't change that there ain't a category and no value behind colossal.

That's a problem of the table, not INA.

[Gruftzwerg]

That's a problem of the table, not INA.

It only makes INA worthless when you can get to colossal size, that's the problem. Not that the rules wouldn't allow it to stack. Just that you don't get vales if you stack it when already colossal = no benefit .

[Eldariel]

It only makes INA worthless when you can get to colossal size, that's the problem. Not that the rules wouldn't allow it to stack. Just that you don't get vales if you stack it when already colossal = no benefit .

Nowhere does it state "to a maximum of Colossal" and the dice are trivial to extrapolate. A table mentions no such restriction either. This argument is only valid if you can find some text stating "Colossal is the maximum damage category". As it stands, no rule caps the damage scaling.

[Gruftzwerg]

Nowhere does it state "to a maximum of Colossal" and the dice are trivial to extrapolate. A table mentions no such restriction either. This argument is only valid if you can find some text stating "Colossal is the maximum damage category". As it stands, no rule caps the damage scaling.

The tables for sizes (be it race or weapon) always "ends" at colossal. And no, you may not extrapolate the table to extend it unless noted otherwise in the rules (there are some tables that allows the DM/PC to further extent it. But that needs to be explicitly mentioned). Since size tables don't have the exception rule, you don't have any sizes beyond colossal and thus no dmg values for them. Again, sole exception would be a few specific dragons with virtual size categories. But that is a "specific rule" which doesn't alter the general rule in any way (= no size beyond colossal for all others).

You may not apply common sense, when we have rules that top that. And in this scenario it is the chase that we have rules that trump common sense. We have rules for size which don't allow any further changes and expending the table.

So unless you can point me to rule text that (specifically) allows you to extrapolate & expend the size tables, it won't work.

[Eldariel]

The tables for sizes (be it race or weapon) always "ends" at colossal. And no, you may not extrapolate the table to extend it unless noted otherwise in the rules (there are some tables that allows the DM/PC to further extent it. But that needs to be explicitly mentioned). Since size tables don't have the exception rule, you don't have any sizes beyond colossal and thus no dmg values for them. Again, sole exception would be a few specific dragons with virtual size categories. But that is a "specific rule" which doesn't alter the general rule in any way (= no size beyond colossal for all others).

You may not apply common sense, when we have rules that top that. And in this scenario it is the chase that we have rules that trump common sense. We have rules for size which don't allow any further changes and expending the table.

So unless you can point me to rule text that (specifically) allows you to extrapolate & expend the size tables, it won't work.

The tables never say they're exclusive nor that you couldn't go beyond them. In fact no rule in the game claims that even though PHB only has stables from small - large creatures (in spite of PHB-only also producing Tiny characters). And if this were true, it would have to either say is generically or in INA: INA has no restriction that Colossal creatures can't take it, just the creature's natural attacks increase by one category. FWIW there might be something about extrapolating in general in the DMG but as I'm AFB right now I don't rightly recall and I can't thus check it out right now.

[Gruftzwerg]

The tables never say they're exclusive nor that you couldn't go beyond them. In fact no rule in the game claims that even though PHB only has stables from small - large creatures (in spite of PHB-only also producing Tiny characters). And if this were true, it would have to either say is generically or in INA: INA has no restriction that Colossal creatures can't take it, just the creature's natural attacks increase by one category. FWIW there might be something about extrapolating in general in the DMG but as I'm AFB right now I don't rightly recall and I can't thus check it out right now.

They don't need to tell you that they are exclusive. Since it is the base assumption of 3.5, that it is permission based. You may only do that what you are allowed to by rules and common sense applies only (!) in the full absence of rules to cover the situation. And the size tables don't give you the permission to extrapolate and extend em. (compared to other tables who explicitly allow you to extend em and not to take em exclusive.).
The rules in 3.5 say that you need extra permission to be allowed to change/extend the table.

You may stack INA with Sizing, but you won't get more than colossal. Neither of them allows you to extend the table. As said, unless you can point me to rule text that gives you the permission to extend the sizing table/categories it won't work out.