Houserules for a 3.5 game

[blackwindbears]

I'm going to DM a 3.5 game in the future (possibly age of worms). It will likely start at 1 and terminate somewhere between level 18 and 25.

I've run a few long term campaigns before. The allowable books will likely be core, the complete series, PHB2, XPH, spell compendium, and Magic item compendium. Fiendish codex I and II.

I'm not very persuaded that the teir system is relevant at my players level of optimization. In combat I've had martials provide a similar set of balance issues as casters (with the exception of monks). Out of combat, I'm more sympathetic to the idea that there are balance issues for certain martials.

Are there any good suggestions to improve fighters and barbarians outside of combat. Any thoughts for monks in combat?

The smallest change that is likely to work is probably what I'll go with.

[daremetoidareyo]

Gestalt fighters with expert. Give monks full bab. Give barbs a bonus feat at level 4 and let them use str for intimidation checks.

[blackwindbears]

Gestalt fighters with expert. Give monks full bab. Give barbs a bonus feat at level 4 and let them use str for intimidation checks.

What does the bonus feat get them, why level 4?

The only effect of gestalting fighters with experts is 6 skill points and good will saves. Are good will saves important to making them better out of combat? Why 6 skill points and not 4? Should fighters get to add str to intimidate checks too?

How would full Bab interact with prestige classes and feats, how much reworking is necessary?

[heavyfuel]

On a similar note to daremetoidareyo's suggestions, have Fighter gestalt with with a bunch of different classes. Seriously, the class is incorrigible and a trap. Just give martial classes who lack maneuvers more feats and be done with a separate "Fighter" class.

Right now, I have the Fighter gestalting with the following classes: Barbarian, Paladin, Knight, Swashbuckler, Marshal, Monk (minus Fighter armor proficiency), Rogue (minus Fighter BAB), and Ranger.

None of these classes break anything, and Fighter Feats give them more versatility in terms of how to build.


BAB interact as normal for PrCs and feats. It's BAB in its purest form.

[blackwindbears]

On a similar note to daremetoidareyo's suggestions, have Fighter gestalt with with a bunch of different classes. Seriously, the class is incorrigible and a trap. Just give martial classes who lack maneuvers more feats and be done with a separate "Fighter" class.

Right now, I have the Fighter gestalting with the following classes: Barbarian, Paladin, Knight, Swashbuckler, Marshal, Monk (minus Fighter armor proficiency), Rogue (minus Fighter BAB), and Ranger.

None of these classes break anything, and Fighter Feats give them more versatility in terms of how to build.


BAB interact as normal for PrCs and feats. It's BAB in its purest form.

I have had substantially more problems with martials than casters in terms of balance. (Impossible! You imagine. Well, I don't know. Maybe it's just my players optimization level, maybe it's the magic items I give out as dm. :Shrug:)

I'm not looking for "fixing" martials combat power they're fine in my games and I don't see that changing in the future. Monks have had a historical problem in my game.

[RedWarlock]

More skill points and a wider skill list would help the martials’ out-of-combat issues.

What are the exact issues you deal with? Maybe if you enumerated them, it would help us to address them better.

[frogglesmash]

I like to import Pathfinder's skill system into all my 3e games, as well as some of Pathfinder's skill consolidations.

[heavyfuel]

Well, you know your players better than any of us. If your casters aren't problematic, let's all hope it stays this way.

Still, if your only intentions are to have the Fighter and Barb perform better outside of combat, I'd give them some maneuvers. I know Tome of Battle isn't one of your approved books, but if you have access to it, maneuvers will also give them pretty good utility.

I'd go for Tiger Claw and Stone Dragon for Barbs, all the Warblade ones for Fighter, and all Swordsage ones for Monk Give them a slower progression if you're afraid of them getting too strong. Something like the Bard spellcasting, ending with 6th level maneuvers.

If you're against maneuvers for whatever reason, I'll tell you to re-think the Gestalt. Allow Fighters to Gestalt with Monk, Rangers, and Paladins. Monks will have better HD and BAB, and the "Nature's Fighter" and "Holy Fighter" new classes will have much better utility.

[One Step Two]

I second combining Fighter with Expert, because it's not just the increase of skill points, but because they can choose any 10 skills to add, they're not just a fighter, they can be the charming Party Face with good ranks in diplomacy, sense motive, and bluff, they can be a Warrior Scholar, with ranks in Knowledge, they can grab the Track Feat, and now they can take survival, they're a worthy tracker as a Ranger. Or they can up their damage with Iaijutsu Focus. The addition of a good Will Save means that they can get away with an average Wisdom score, and not be punished for it.

Monks Suffer in many ways, the full BAB means that they aren't totally screwed by using their Flurry of blows, but elaborating on what makes them problematic to your group would help give us an idea for other suggestions. Though one I use off the bat, is they can use their Wisdom in place of Int for skill points per level, this helps reduce MAD a little.

[blackwindbears]

More skill points and a wider skill list would help the martials’ out-of-combat issues.

What are the exact issues you deal with? Maybe if you enumerated them, it would help us to address them better.

What skills do you think you would add to which. Balance, spot, and listen seem reasonable to add to the fighter. Heal? It seems plausible that fighters would be matter of course trained in first aid. Add X skills of your choice to the class skill list seems reasonable to me as well, it's flexible like the fighter is.

The issue I've faced is that out of combat, at medium levels, they're usually forced to make rolls they aren't good at, and consequently don't contribute much until it's time to kill something again. I'd be interested to see what out of combat niche they could be given.


I second combining Fighter with Expert, because it's not just the increase of skill points, but because they can choose any 10 skills to add, they're not just a fighter, they can be the charming Party Face with good ranks in diplomacy, sense motive, and bluff, they can be a Warrior Scholar, with ranks in Knowledge, they can grab the Track Feat, and now they can take survival, they're a worthy tracker as a Ranger. Or they can up their damage with Iaijutsu Focus. The addition of a good Will Save means that they can get away with an average Wisdom score, and not be punished for it.

Monks Suffer in many ways, the full BAB means that they aren't totally screwed by using their Flurry of blows, but elaborating on what makes them problematic to your group would help give us an idea for other suggestions. Though one I use off the bat, is they can use their Wisdom in place of Int for skill points per level, this helps reduce MAD a little.

The issue monks seem to have is that they miss, they don't do much damage when they hit. Flurry of blows is a full round action (I *think*).

There's a fun grapple concept or trip concept there, but it's difficult to succeed on the checks against typical monsters.


Well, you know your players better than any of us. If your casters aren't problematic, let's all hope it stays this way.

Still, if your only intentions are to have the Fighter and Barb perform better outside of combat, I'd give them some maneuvers. I know Tome of Battle isn't one of your approved books, but if you have access to it, maneuvers will also give them pretty good utility.

I'd go for Tiger Claw and Stone Dragon for Barbs, all the Warblade ones for Fighter, and all Swordsage ones for Monk Give them a slower progression if you're afraid of them getting too strong. Something like the Bard spellcasting, ending with 6th level maneuvers.

If you're against maneuvers for whatever reason, I'll tell you to re-think the Gestalt. Allow Fighters to Gestalt with Monk, Rangers, and Paladins. Monks will have better HD and BAB, and the "Nature's Fighter" and "Holy Fighter" new classes will have much better utility.

I don't see why giving them 10 bonus feats will do much more than make them better at combat. The last campaign I ran, (shackled city 1-20) the ranger had plenty to do outside of combat, but broke all of the high level boss encounters, because he never lost intiative and essentially forced me to put wind wall on everything, or watch it die before it got an action. Giving it 10 bonus feats would have made this problem substantially worse. (I imagine if fighters were a free gestalt class he would have done Nature's fighter rather than a regular ranger).

[Aegis013]

Looking at out of combat utility/interactivity with the world and setting, it may be best just to tailor what they can do to their character and goals. Make things specifically for their characters. Maybe they have connections with an organization they communicate to off screen, or have a contact from the outer planes who owes them one or more favors but won't risk their neck in combat for the PC.

A lot of options outside of that starts to fall to "spells" or "spells but".

You could houserule that every character needs something like that in their backstory, run by and approved by you if they lack spellcasting.

[radthemad4]

Improving something out of combat without also making something better at combat is tricky I think. Gestalting them with a full caster boosts non combat capabilities and is a quick fix, but definitely also makes them better at combat. I think doing away with crossclass skills and using something like Skill Groups (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56277) would help with lower levels at least.

You could give them utility powers. e.g.


Level 1

Track: A Barbarian gets Track as a bonus feat

Level 2

Break Things Good (Ex): A Barbarian is really good at breaking things, they can successfully smash or break any object they ever could after a moment of gathering their Rage. In effect, the Barbarian can take 20 in two rounds instead of 20 when making a check to break an object with a strength check, or to disable any device with the Disable Device skill (using strength instead of intelligence). But only if they are disabling in the most simple and direct manner, Smashing something so it is rendered inoperable. This does set off traps when you break them. The Barbarian can use this to disable any kind of trap regardless of DC, even magical traps, and as an exception to the two rounds time, the Barbarian can use this ability reactively on any trap that has triggered and effected them, but after the effect of the trap.


I once tried to make something I called 'Utility Tracks' (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3ajixsabpje4wla/AACsEs1IXAIouBzKor5OcaPUa?dl=0) (e.g. Infiltrator, Tracker, Naturalist, Face) that any class without out of combat powers would have been able to sort of gestalt with (they offer abilities, but not BAB, HD or saves), but never got too far with it. It does 'give them spells' though, but I've tried to avoid ones that are only useful in combat (though unfortunately quite a few of these are 'also' useful in combat. I don't know, maybe they could be made only usable when you'd normally be able to take 10 or something?). It's very very incomplete and definitely not balanced, but I think the idea has merit and just needs a much better execution (with more 'abilities' and fewer or no 'spells').

[Kelb_Panthera]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#fighterVariantThug

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a specifically the skilled city dweller substitution toward the bottom.

Beyond that, you need to be sure you actually have a problem with the fighter and barbarian. If you've chosen to play one of those classes, odds are you're not that concerned with out of combat problems, particularly the fighter.


Then there's the monk. :smallsigh:

I'm playing one now and I'm not convinced they absolutely need it but if you must, have you considered changing their fast movement by allowing them to move that distance as a swift action instead of simply adding it to their base speed? Damage is just a matter of properly improving their weapon. Import SS necklace of natural attacks and let him get that juicy enhancement bonus plus damage boosting special abilities, remembering that the unarmed strike is just one weapon. If he's already using a special monk weapon, the increased number of hits from swift-action movement should help to offset the lower damage per hit.

[Elkad]

Stats:
Base stats are 12, and then pointbuy from there. Adventurers are above average. That's 24 free statpoints, but it's well distributed.
If you like dice, use something like 10+2d4 for 3 stats, and 10+1d4 for the other 3.

A bunch of extra Strength or Wisdom doesn't help the Wizard much, but having spare points for int or cha instead of having to dump them helps the Fighter types be more relevant non-combat, helps the Paladin or Monk not be so MAD, etc.

Skills:
Every class level taken that isn't in a full caster class gets +2 skillpoints.
Make every skill that isn't "Trained Only" a class skill for everyone. (plus any trained-only skills on their class list of course).
(So everything but Decipher Script, Disable Device, Handle Animal, Knowledges, Open Lock, Professions, Sleight of Hand, Speak Language, Tumble, and UMD).

[Telonius]

I've been tinkering around with a bunch of Monk houserules for a while. Haven't quite hit on something that ties it together, but here's what I have.


Remove alignment requirements.
BAB increases to 1 per level.
Weapon Proficiencies: add Gauntlet, Spiked Gauntlet, and Unarmed Strike. (Just for completeness' sake).
Monk Weapons: add Gauntlet and Spiked Gauntlet.
A Monk can spend time, money, and XP enchanting her own body as though she had the Craft Magic Weapon and Armor feat. The gold is spent on expensive incense that’s burned during a special meditation (rather than magical reagents). Treat the Monk as an equivalent-level spellcaster for the purposes of prerequisite caster levels. (If any spellcaster of equivalent level would normally be capable of casting an enchantment prerequisite, the Monk is capable of giving herself the enchantment).

A Monk adds a bonus equal to her Monk level/5 (minimum 1) to all Grapple checks.

At 4th level, a Monk gains the following ability:
Channel ki (Su) A Monk wielding either a Monk weapon or a Ki Focus weapon may use the monk’s unarmed damage (if higher than the weapon’s regular damage) on any successful attack roll.

At 5th level, a Monk may use the Flurry of Blows ability as a Standard Action.

At 8th level, a Monk is treated as one size category larger for the purposes of Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Trip, Overrun, and Sunder checks. At 14th level, the Monk is treated as two categories larger. This does not stack with any other size increases (Enlarge Person etc).

At 10th level, a Monk adds her Wisdom modifier (if positive) as a bonus to damage when using Monk weapons.

Replace the Abundant Step ability at 12th level with the following:
Walk on the Clouds (Su). At 12th level or higher, a monk can take to the air, as if using the spell Air Walk, for a number of rounds per day equal to her Monk level plus her Wisdom modifier. These rounds do not need to be consecutive. For purposes of dispelling, her caster level is equal to her Monk level.

The Quivering Palm ability is usable once per day. If the Monk successfully strikes the foe, the Monk must make a Concentration check. The result of this check is the fortitude save DC.

Perfect Self: Damage Reduction changes to 10/Adamantine.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

How are you doing epic without the Epic Level Handbook?

Also, anyone with psionics should get The Mind's Eye and probably Untapped Potential and Hyperconscious, as well.

And ignore the stupid astral construct and metacreativity nerfs in Complete Psionic, of course. The new types of astral constructs should gain menu abilities like normal constructs instead of losing them (which makes most of them much, much worse).

[lightningcat]

One of the simplist skill fixes I have seen is not having cross class skills cost 2 points. Everything cost 1 point, although the limits remain the same.

Fighters getting 4/level and a few more choices makes them good enough for non-optimized groups.

[blackwindbears]

Improving something out of combat without also making something better at combat is tricky I think. Gestalting them with a full caster boosts non combat capabilities and is a quick fix, but definitely also makes them better at combat. I think doing away with crossclass skills and using something like Skill Groups (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56277) would help with lower levels at least.

You could give them utility powers. e.g.

<Cool barbarian and fighter stuff>



I like both of these, great idea.



http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#fighterVariantThug

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a specifically the skilled city dweller substitution toward the bottom.

Beyond that, you need to be sure you actually have a problem with the fighter and barbarian. If you've chosen to play one of those classes, odds are you're not that concerned with out of combat problems, particularly the fighter.


Then there's the monk. :smallsigh:

I'm playing one now and I'm not convinced they absolutely need it but if you must, have you considered changing their fast movement by allowing them to move that distance as a swift action instead of simply adding it to their base speed? Damage is just a matter of properly improving their weapon. Import SS necklace of natural attacks and let him get that juicy enhancement bonus plus damage boosting special abilities, remembering that the unarmed strike is just one weapon. If he's already using a special monk weapon, the increased number of hits from swift-action movement should help to offset the lower damage per hit.

Swift action movement always seems to be something that martials want. At least the monk would benefit from level one. On the face of it, seems like a good idea.

[blackwindbears]

How are you doing epic without the Epic Level Handbook?

Also, anyone with psionics should get The Mind's Eye and probably Untapped Potential and Hyperconscious, as well.

And ignore the stupid astral construct and metacreativity nerfs in Complete Psionic, of course. The new types of astral constructs should gain menu abilities like normal constructs instead of losing them (which makes most of them much, much worse).

Epic is in the DMG, and scattered through the completes as well. Frankly I was counting it as core though. I use a variant of epic spellcasting though.

What in particular is in minds eye and untapped potential that you think is too important to be missed?

[daremetoidareyo]

Minds eye has a strict upgrade to the soulknife, the call weapon acf for psywars, and acfs for psions. Also some ok prestige classes. I suggest banning spell to power erudite.

[ericgrau]

I like to carry 101 low cost magic items for utility purposes, especially on my fighter types. If you start giving out large piles of small items, random or selected, you tend to get a lot of these.

Monks are good at spamming special attacks. So first issue is any monk that does ordinary punches is already screwing himself. Second issue is that special attack rules are complicated, so we can't just blame the player for punching. Whereas other abilities including psionics and MIC items are easy to employ. 3rd at mid to high level he needs size boosting item(s) to keep up. In general he benefits more from buffs (whether from items or players), much more than other martials. More can target him. In terms of size boosting and special attacks, psychic warrior can just expansion and laugh at him. Though psychic warrior doesn't get as many attacks nor do as much grapple damage.

The point of all that is that I'm setting up what the monk does, and how it falls behind once you start adding more books. At least without some tricks that are probably too high optimization for you guys. Anyway, give the monk some class boosts to special attacks such as a +2 to all (grapple, trip, disarm, sunder, etc.). Or +1 scaling to +6 by level 20. Maybe up his unarmed damage slightly for grapples and stunning fists (1 die size for example), but still strongly encourage him to make vanilla punches a last resort. Allow custom items of expansion: easily available tattoos, X/day and permanent items. Grapple rules are very fuzzy, so when in doubt allow flurry grappling.

So then the monk looks something like this: Expansion tattoo/enlarge person potion, walk into foes (can skip enlarging on some foes). Round 2 flurry grapple attempts or TWF kama trips. Don't forget you can 5' step partway through a full attack. Monk is essentially an area and/or single target debuff that still does so-so damage too. If he grapples he continues to deal decent damage whereas most foes have pitiful grapple damage regardless of their modifier. Those with natural weapons still face a -4 to hit. Those grappling are also much much easier for others to hit, opening up sneak attack and power attack. Confused yet? Cheat sheets in my sig.

Oh yeah, monk str>con>wis>dex. While nice, don't worry too much about wis and dex and then you can have less MAD stress.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Epic is in the DMG, and scattered through the completes as well. Frankly I was counting it as core though. I use a variant of epic spellcasting though.

What in particular is in minds eye and untapped potential that you think is too important to be missed?Options. Casters and martials get something in very nearly every supplement, and unless you're in Eberron, psionics just doesn't. Adding three books' worth of (mostly) solid options for psionic types is a good thing.

[daremetoidareyo]

I compiled all of the minds eye articles into a single pdf. Check my archiving the archives link in my signature to peruse it.

[ATalsen]

If your looking for quick simple fixes, I support the addition of +4 skill points to each class - possibly not to caster classes if you think they have enough to do already.

Give Monk full BAB. They miss less often, and are then just as good with a weapon as any other martial class, and if martial classes work fine in your game as is, that's probably enough.

Slightly more complex is to look at the skill list and decide which you think are 'out of combat skills', and just give martials their choice of 2 of those skills always at max rank. They then have something they can fall back on without being bad at it, and they can't just dump any extra skill points into combat-useful skills.

[Godskook]

Unless you particularly *WANT* the stupidly-overpowered-campaign-warping that comes from high-level 3.5, I suggest(strongly if you don't use a module) using some sort of E6 system. Martials and Casters are more balanced at level 6 than they are at level 7+ or 1-4.(level 7+ full-casters start getting the absurdly-good spells at 4th spell level, but lack sufficient "oomph" at level 4 unless ridiculously optimized.

Personally, specifically, I can recommend my own houserule for this that I call Approach: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16FfgVpvPDWm2DAHznP5AU4BRkI3nf_mfBOekEv4750s/edit

It uses E6, but adds in a gestalt-progression that lets characters continue to advance once they hit the HD cap. The main benefit is that no single class needs to stand on it's own, so the weaknesses that plague many classes stops existing. A Fighter can pick up levels in Rogue to be a flanking/skillful Fighter, or go Wizard to become some sort of Gish-y spellblade.

Works best with more base classes allowed, as I've yet to incorporate prestige classes into the rule system.

[blackwindbears]

Unless you particularly *WANT* the stupidly-overpowered-campaign-warping that comes from high-level 3.5, I suggest(strongly if you don't use a module) using some sort of E6 system. Martials and Casters are more balanced at level 6 than they are at level 7+ or 1-4.(level 7+ full-casters start getting the absurdly-good spells at 4th spell level, but lack sufficient "oomph" at level 4 unless ridiculously optimized.

Personally, specifically, I can recommend my own houserule for this that I call Approach: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16FfgVpvPDWm2DAHznP5AU4BRkI3nf_mfBOekEv4750s/edit

It uses E6, but adds in a gestalt-progression that lets characters continue to advance once they hit the HD cap. The main benefit is that no single class needs to stand on it's own, so the weaknesses that plague many classes stops existing. A Fighter can pick up levels in Rogue to be a flanking/skillful Fighter, or go Wizard to become some sort of Gish-y spellblade.

Works best with more base classes allowed, as I've yet to incorporate prestige classes into the rule system.

Sounds like a fun idea.

Of course I've never really run into the game becoming an overpowered mess. Belts of Battle made it a little bit like rocket-tag after about level 15, but most of the issues lived in a solve-able place. (and belts of battle are so deeply banned at my table now.)

Also kinda violates the, "smallest change possible" clause in the original post.


If your looking for quick simple fixes, I support the addition of +4 skill points to each class - possibly not to caster classes if you think they have enough to do already.

Give Monk full BAB. They miss less often, and are then just as good with a weapon as any other martial class, and if martial classes work fine in your game as is, that's probably enough.

Slightly more complex is to look at the skill list and decide which you think are 'out of combat skills', and just give martials their choice of 2 of those skills always at max rank. They then have something they can fall back on without being bad at it, and they can't just dump any extra skill points into combat-useful skills.

Any advice on out of combat skills that would be thematic for fighter/barbarian?

I'm quite unlikely to give the monk full BAB, feat entries and prestige class entries are often based off BAB or skill ranks. I don't want to spend literally any time figuring out what early entry for monk friendly prestige classes would mean. Not really opposed to bonus to hit though. Would it be easier just to let him add wisdom to attack and damage?


I like to carry 101 low cost magic items for utility purposes, especially on my fighter types. If you start giving out large piles of small items, random or selected, you tend to get a lot of these.

Monks are good at spamming special attacks. So first issue is any monk that does ordinary punches is already screwing himself. Second issue is that special attack rules are complicated, so we can't just blame the player for punching. Whereas other abilities including psionics and MIC items are easy to employ. 3rd at mid to high level he needs size boosting item(s) to keep up. In general he benefits more from buffs (whether from items or players), much more than other martials. More can target him. In terms of size boosting and special attacks, psychic warrior can just expansion and laugh at him. Though psychic warrior doesn't get as many attacks nor do as much grapple damage.

The point of all that is that I'm setting up what the monk does, and how it falls behind once you start adding more books. At least without some tricks that are probably too high optimization for you guys. Anyway, give the monk some class boosts to special attacks such as a +2 to all (grapple, trip, disarm, sunder, etc.). Or +1 scaling to +6 by level 20. Maybe up his unarmed damage slightly for grapples and stunning fists (1 die size for example), but still strongly encourage him to make vanilla punches a last resort. Allow custom items of expansion: easily available tattoos, X/day and permanent items. Grapple rules are very fuzzy, so when in doubt allow flurry grappling.

So then the monk looks something like this: Expansion tattoo/enlarge person potion, walk into foes (can skip enlarging on some foes). Round 2 flurry grapple attempts or TWF kama trips. Don't forget you can 5' step partway through a full attack. Monk is essentially an area and/or single target debuff that still does so-so damage too. If he grapples he continues to deal decent damage whereas most foes have pitiful grapple damage regardless of their modifier. Those with natural weapons still face a -4 to hit. Those grappling are also much much easier for others to hit, opening up sneak attack and power attack. Confused yet? Cheat sheets in my sig.

Oh yeah, monk str>con>wis>dex. While nice, don't worry too much about wis and dex and then you can have less MAD stress.

Thanks for the thoughts. Flurry tripping/grappling is something I've done when I've played monks but I don't know that my players ever have thought of it.

[Godskook]

Also kinda violates the, "smallest change possible" clause in the original post.

That did read like "negotiable for the right suggestion" to me, so I figured I'd make the suggestion and let you decide if you liked it or not. (Also, base E6 is a very light-weight ruleset, so there's versions of my suggestion that fit "small change" depending on how you define small)

[ATalsen]

Any advice on out of combat skills that would be thematic for fighter/barbarian?

Survival
Any profession that makes sense.
Gather Information
Handle Animal
Heal
Intimidate
Perform

The skills most important for out of combat interactions are the ones the DM (or module) emphasize. So if you LIKE or want to encourage the use of any skill as part of solutions to out of combat interaction, then those are the skills you will want to promote to your players.

For example, in a campaign featuring significant politics between religions, Know: Religion may actually help contribute significantly to resolving (or even understanding) out of combat problems/interactions.



I'm quite unlikely to give the monk full BAB, feat entries and prestige class entries are often based off BAB or skill ranks. I don't want to spend literally any time figuring out what early entry for monk friendly prestige classes would mean. Not really opposed to bonus to hit though. Would it be easier just to let him add wisdom to attack and damage?

Ok, got it.
Then how just about removing the Flurry of blows 2 point penalty. That would encourage the monk to close with opponents and let lose without missing as much, without having to worry about any Prerequisite issues.

You could absolutely also let the Monk substitute Wisdom for Strength on melee attacks - that helps the Monk be less MAD (Multiple attribute dependent).

[King of Nowhere]

I think gestalting ffighter with expert is a wonderful idea. the fighter get more skills. Can now be good at diplomacy, or knowledge, or plenty of other coombat situation. At the same time, he won't have the stat modifier to compete with a real champion in those fields, so the bard won't fear for his place in the party. And it won't afffect combat in the slightest.




The issue monks seem to have is that they miss, they don't do much damage when they hit. Flurry of blows is a full round action (I *think*).

There's a fun grapple concept or trip concept there, but it's difficult to succeed on the checks against typical monsters.



The problem with monks is actually the fluff. They are described as strong figthers without equipment, and people expect them to fight. without equipment.
Monks get a ton of versatility, possibly the highest combat versatility for a non-caster. they have a lot of survivability thanks to high saving throws, good speed, and limited teleportation capacity. If they had all this, and they were hitting as hard as fighters or barbarians, then the class would be seriously imbalanced.
The problem is that inexperienced players get a monk thinking that they'll be going toe to toe with the fighters and the barbarians, when it's not what they should be doing.
Oh, and they need equipment as much as any fighter class.

As a monk player, I got the improved trip feat for free, and I talked my DM into letting me take a refluffed version of powerful buid that just basically give me a +4 to grapple, trip and related checks without racial prerequisites. That's a +8 from feats, enough to pull down basically any humanoid - heck, last time I brought down a huge-sized greater stone golem. I also carry some potions of enlarge person, for when the wizard is too busy to cast one on me. they are just 50 gp each, and they also give reach. Now I'm a disabling machine that goes in the middle of the fray and trip everyone with attacks of opportunity (combat reflexes is also something I got for free). I also took mage slayer and pierce magical concealment, so when I walk up to a caster, that caster is very prepared for the specific situation or is toast. And when the enemy team gang on me to take me down, our wizard fireballs the area.
My maxxed spot check and good listen check also let me be the group scout, and chief deputy at detecting illusions (detect magic has limited duration and the wizard can't have it always on).
To sum it up, The monk is not a fighter, the monk is a support. Do not expect it to deal damage as a fighter, expect it to be very annoying to fight against.

That said, there are some problems with the monk that you could address. One of them is that his class skills have very limited uses. abundant step is a dimension dooor, great! But you can use it once per day. So the wizard simply has to cast forcecage twice. Make abundant step a 3/day, or 3+WIS modifier/week, and that's cool; same for quivering palm. Give abundant step, ki strike (adamantine) and quivering palm a few levels earlier. Seriously, quivering palm is basically slay living, and clerics get it at level 9.

But, more important than anything, make sure the monk have some right encounters to shine. This includes putting enemy wizards trying to cast dominate person on him (the foremost situation where a monk player will be glad he's not a fighter!). Give him enemies that are vulnerable to being tripped. Include some difficult terrain where his jump and tumble skills will be useful. If you only make the party fight big gargantuan monsters that hit hard and need to be hit harder, of course the monk will be useless.
But that's the same as not setting up the party rogue against golems and undead all the time. Or not setting up a sorceror who took chiefly fire spells against fire-immune monsters. Everyone, except high tier classes at high optimization levels, has some ights where they just can't contribute, and you should avoid too many of them.

EDIT: oh, I was forgetting: monks have another problems, they are awfully MAD. They need a good STR to fight, WIS for monk skills, DEX because without armor their AC sucks, and CON because they are expected to go in melee with low AC and low hit die. And they also need a bit of INT, because they have lots of skills they should be taking, but only 4 skill points.
So, one important thing is to allow good dice rolls. Point buy 32 is the minimum to play a monk with any reasonable hope to be effective. Let them have at least a couple of +3 and a couple of +2.

[blackwindbears]

That did read like "negotiable for the right suggestion" to me, so I figured I'd make the suggestion and let you decide if you liked it or not. (Also, base E6 is a very light-weight ruleset, so there's versions of my suggestion that fit "small change" depending on how you define small)

Sorry, I realized that came out a bit snappy. I appreciate the input. I'm looking to run something like Age of Worms though.



The problem with monks is actually the fluff. They are described as strong figthers without equipment, and people expect them to fight. without equipment.
Monks get a ton of versatility, possibly the highest combat versatility for a non-caster. they have a lot of survivability thanks to high saving throws, good speed, and limited teleportation capacity. If they had all this, and they were hitting as hard as fighters or barbarians, then the class would be seriously imbalanced.
The problem is that inexperienced players get a monk thinking that they'll be going toe to toe with the fighters and the barbarians, when it's not what they should be doing.
Oh, and they need equipment as much as any fighter class.

As a monk player, I got the improved trip feat for free, and I talked my DM into letting me take a refluffed version of powerful buid that just basically give me a +4 to grapple, trip and related checks without racial prerequisites. That's a +8 from feats, enough to pull down basically any humanoid - heck, last time I brought down a huge-sized greater stone golem. I also carry some potions of enlarge person, for when the wizard is too busy to cast one on me. they are just 50 gp each, and they also give reach. Now I'm a disabling machine that goes in the middle of the fray and trip everyone with attacks of opportunity (combat reflexes is also something I got for free). I also took mage slayer and pierce magical concealment, so when I walk up to a caster, that caster is very prepared for the specific situation or is toast. And when the enemy team gang on me to take me down, our wizard fireballs the area.
My maxxed spot check and good listen check also let me be the group scout, and chief deputy at detecting illusions (detect magic has limited duration and the wizard can't have it always on).
To sum it up, The monk is not a fighter, the monk is a support. Do not expect it to deal damage as a fighter, expect it to be very annoying to fight against.

That said, there are some problems with the monk that you could address. One of them is that his class skills have very limited uses. abundant step is a dimension dooor, great! But you can use it once per day. So the wizard simply has to cast forcecage twice. Make abundant step a 3/day, or 3+WIS modifier/week, and that's cool; same for quivering palm. Give abundant step, ki strike (adamantine) and quivering palm a few levels earlier. Seriously, quivering palm is basically slay living, and clerics get it at level 9.

But, more important than anything, make sure the monk have some right encounters to shine. This includes putting enemy wizards trying to cast dominate person on him (the foremost situation where a monk player will be glad he's not a fighter!). Give him enemies that are vulnerable to being tripped. Include some difficult terrain where his jump and tumble skills will be useful. If you only make the party fight big gargantuan monsters that hit hard and need to be hit harder, of course the monk will be useless.
But that's the same as not setting up the party rogue against golems and undead all the time. Or not setting up a sorceror who took chiefly fire spells against fire-immune monsters. Everyone, except high tier classes at high optimization levels, has some ights where they just can't contribute, and you should avoid too many of them.

EDIT: oh, I was forgetting: monks have another problems, they are awfully MAD. They need a good STR to fight, WIS for monk skills, DEX because without armor their AC sucks, and CON because they are expected to go in melee with low AC and low hit die. And they also need a bit of INT, because they have lots of skills they should be taking, but only 4 skill points.
So, one important thing is to allow good dice rolls. Point buy 32 is the minimum to play a monk with any reasonable hope to be effective. Let them have at least a couple of +3 and a couple of +2.

This is a bunch of really useful thoughts about the monk.

[Godskook]

Sorry, I realized that came out a bit snappy. I appreciate the input. I'm looking to run something like Age of Worms though.

It came out within the realm of reasonable conversation, imho. Nothing you clarified was unreasonable for you to clarify, in regards to the further usefulness of this thread.

[ngilop]

I would give the fighter as a 'base' then depending on how they want to play their fighter allow a gestalt based on that
Examples:
want to be a lightly armored kinda stylish warrior? well now you get to gestalt fighter with swashbuckler

want to be a durable warrior concerned with protecting your allies? well, now you get to gestalt fighter with knight


so on and so forth.

For monks I suggest allow themt o aply wisdom mod to unarmed attack and damage is a decent enough buff. Letting them flurry as a standard action is prtty easy as well.

[r2d2go]

I disagree with some of the previously said things about monk - they're not built to be supports, or dps, or tanks, or anything really. They're a bunch of vaguely thematic but asynergistic abilities tossed onto a generic frame. Trying to get a good class out of the existing set of abilities is nothing but heartache.

Instead, I recommend one of many complete overhauls/similarly themed classes, or a similar homebrew set. Want a mystical unarmed fighter who pulls off supernatural feats with martial skill? Go with unarmed Swordsage, or Qinggong monk from Pathfinder. Want a expert brawler who has a wide variety of maneuvers to get an edge on their enemy? Go for unarmed Warblade. Want an agile attacker who hits someone until they die? Take Unchained Monk from pathfinder.

Basically, figure out what your players want, and don't feel restricted by the name or source book of a class. In the end, none of these are going to be egregiously overpowered compared to an ubercharger or high level caster, and in the end the magic items you give out and advice you give players is going to be more important than even moderately large tweaks to a class. So aim for what seems fun to the player with the concept, not "building a balanced monk".



As for fighters and barbarians - Fighters have the primary issue of being uninteresting and either optimized or useless. Barbarians have the primary issue that they get nothing but base stats most levels they advance. Pathfinder barbarians are much better than 3.5 ones, since they get rage powers every 2 levels that do interesting things as they rage, so I'd highly recommend that. Fighters are probably better off being some other class entirely - I agree with most of the assessments of previous responses there.

[BassoonHero]

The problem with monks is that they aren't really good at anything and they aren't a jack-of-all-trades. They're "meh" at a couple of things, and that's it.

Obviously, they aren't very good at fighting. They will be consistently outclassed by proper melee characters and by level-appropriate encounters. It sounds like everyone here agrees on that point. But while they get a pile of other abilities, none of them makes them particularly good at any non-combat task, nor are they broad enough to allow the monk to contribute across the board.

Monks are not good at combat maneuvers. They have a built-in penalty relative to martial characters. They get a couple of bonus feats, but several levels later than an interested martial character would. But while Improved Trip is necessary to be any good at tripping, it's not sufficient; you need other bonuses to be able to use it consistently, and you need to spend feats on a payoff more substantial than costing your target a move action. Sure, the monk could make a deeper investment, but they'll still be much worse than martial characters at it. This is even more true for grappling, which monks are very bad at. (Now, if your DM gives you access to houseruled combat maneuver bonuses, then that's a start, but a start only.)

You mention relying on potions to get the Strength bonuses you need. That's a standard action per potion. (Does it stack with your custom house-ruled bonus?) Then you run into a crowd of enemies and hope that they provoke AoOs. What is your Dex modifier? Are enemies really just giving you multiple free attacks? Why are they doing that? Why not just hit the large stationary target who spent his turn moving within full-attack range? You have a d8 hit dice; what is your Con? What is your AC? (Remember to subtract two for the potion.)

Monks are skill-starved. MAD is awful, and most monks are lucky to get four points per level. Spot and Listen are fine skills -- but having common class skills is hardly a selling point. Monks don't have the tools to perceive stealthy opponents at mid levels; you have to rely on magic items like everyone else. Other than those, the skills they get are mostly those rendered obsolete by magic items.

Monks are not particularly mobile. Features like Flurry of Blows and Combat Reflexes require that they sit stationary. Even ignoring those, speed boosts are widely accessible to your party members, if they want them. You can't fly; you have to rely on magic items, and at that point you're not getting much mileage out of your land speed. You get Dimension Door once per day, five levels after spellcasters have it. The ability immediately ends your turn, so it's not any good on offense. You'd be much better off with cheap tactical teleportation items like Anklets of Translocation and Boots of Swift Passage, which most martial characters will probably pick up anyway. More uses of Dimension Door would hardly matter; the ability is simply outclassed in most situations by cheaper options that anyone can use.

Pierce Magical Concealment is a fine feat by itself. Unfortunately, its prerequisites are not. Rather than take three feats, most martial characters will simply use magic items that work just as well most of the time. None of this is monk-specific, and several martial classes actually have easier access if they really want it. (Also, that's four of your skill points for the cross-class Spellcraft, and a minimum ability requirement.)


This includes putting enemy wizards trying to cast dominate person on him (the foremost situation where a monk player will be glad he's not a fighter!)
Why would a wizard cast Dominate Person on the character likely to have the best Will save? You shouldn't have to rely on your opponents making stupid decisions. Why not use area control to target the monk's mobility? (Forcecage is overkill; how about Web?) And why bother targeting the least threatening party member in the first place?


Give him enemies that are vulnerable to being tripped.
A monk is going to have a lot of trouble tripping level-appropriate encounters that care about being tripped. You'll have an even harder time following it up. Even if you hit them with the Improved Trip followup, you're hardly a damage powerhouse.


Include some difficult terrain where his jump and tumble skills will be useful.
Most martial classes have access to those skills as well as other ways of circumventing difficult terrain. Anyone who doesn't will find a magical solution that's probably better anyway.

You might object that other characters are spending money on magic items to do these things. But the magical solutions are generally cheap and usually better. In a campaign where magic items are hard to find, the monk is in serious trouble, needing multiple stat boosters and a pile of fairly specific utility items (you can't just pick up a random +2 martial weapon; you need one of a handful of rare weapons or a specific wondrous item). If it's twelfth level and the fighter still hasn't managed to find Boots of Swift Passage (or any of several alternatives), then you're going to be a lot more unhappy that you can't find a +1 weapon or a Monk's Belt.

[blackwindbears]

I disagree with some of the previously said things about monk - they're not built to be supports, or dps, or tanks, or anything really. They're a bunch of vaguely thematic but asynergistic abilities tossed onto a generic frame. Trying to get a good class out of the existing set of abilities is nothing but heartache.


Basically, figure out what your players want, and don't feel restricted by the name or source book of a class. In the end, none of these are going to be egregiously overpowered compared to an ubercharger or high level caster, and in the end the magic items you give out and advice you give players is going to be more important than even moderately large tweaks to a class. So aim for what seems fun to the player with the concept, not "building a balanced monk".


I have no interest in running any of the Tome of Battle stuff. I've seen core monks perform just fine, but not with my current players, and the problem does seem to be that they are attempting to use them like they're a barbarian.



As for fighters and barbarians - Fighters have the primary issue of being uninteresting and either optimized or useless. Barbarians have the primary issue that they get nothing but base stats most levels they advance. Pathfinder barbarians are much better than 3.5 ones, since they get rage powers every 2 levels that do interesting things as they rage, so I'd highly recommend that. Fighters are probably better off being some other class entirely - I agree with most of the assessments of previous responses there.

I've seen some pretty un-optimized fighters over the last 12 years. None of them were useless. They hit things they were supposed to hit, and did damage. I've seen useless rogues; I've seen some pretty useless bards; I've seen useless monks; one player played a psychic warrior that just seemed totally intent on uselessness. I've watched sorcerers be useless. Fighter is the one class I've just never seen anyone screw up so bad they couldn't contribute during combat.

Sometimes these discussions seem like people are playing an entirely different game than I am.

[dethkruzer]

One thing I'd suggest, especially if you plan on running combat-heavy sessions toward those last levels, is dropping the massive damage rule by around level 15 at the latest. Especially if manuevers come into play, then any character worth their salt will trigger (possibly several) massive damage saves every round, which in turn would just lead to more dice rolls that are pointless 95% of the time, which in turn would bog down combat.

[King of Nowhere]

I disagree with some of the previously said things about monk - they're not built to be supports, or dps, or tanks, or anything really. They're a bunch of vaguely thematic but asynergistic abilities tossed onto a generic frame. Trying to get a good class out of the existing set of abilities is nothing but heartache.

Instead, I recommend one of many complete overhauls/similarly themed classes, or a similar homebrew set. Want a mystical unarmed fighter who pulls off supernatural feats with martial skill? Go with unarmed Swordsage, or Qinggong monk from Pathfinder. Want a expert brawler who has a wide variety of maneuvers to get an edge on their enemy? Go for unarmed Warblade. Want an agile attacker who hits someone until they die? Take Unchained Monk from pathfinder.



The problem with monks is that they aren't really good at anything and they aren't a jack-of-all-trades. They're "meh" at a couple of things, and that's it.


That's a matter of perspective, and of optimization level.
The thing is, while you are certainly more effective by focusing on one thing (or by being a caster, of course. Everything I say implies the exclusion of any full casting class), you also have more limited options. If you are not playing at a terribly high optimization level, you can afford to be a jack-of-all trades with a core monk. Sure, if you get an unarmed swordsage you can deal more damage, but then you'd be at the mercy of anything that can force a will save. Sure, you could trip better by being an unarmed warblade, or even better, a fighter with a spiked chain. But you would, again, suck against spells, and you would have even less skill points.

One thing monks are really good at doing is resisting spells. They are the best class I know for it. high saving throws, spell resistance, good mobility, good capacity to disable the spellcaster if you manage to get close. And since I come up with the idea of a guy who lost his parents to an evil wizard and trained to fight spellcasters, well, monk was the class for me. Of course a well optimized caster will destroy me regardless, but at the level of optimization most people use, I can do my job effectively.
There is also the fact that I am the most skilled optimizer in the party, so I picked a bad class to make sure I wouldn't accidentally outshine the others.

And sure, I admit that in most fights I am redundant. Most times I trip the enemy, deal my 15-20 damage from followup, then the fighter charges and deals 60 damage or more. And the next round makes a full attack for 150 damage, while I may deal 50. And most times the +4 I give my allies by tripping the enemy doesn't make much of a difference. Few times we fight casters, and when we do they are more often slain by a maximized fireball or a disintegrate. Most times the enemy casters are smart enough to not hit the monk with anything that requires saving throws.

But you know what? That's ok. I get my chances to shine, I get to feel I'm useful, or at least I would be useful if most of the party got disabled for some reasons. Most of all, I get to do whacky cool stuff. I am the guy who thought "wizards gave up weapons and became more powerful, so if I give up weapons AND spells I'll be even more powerful!" (my monk is not exactly dumb, but he has a big blind spot where he takes the concept that "hardness builds character" way too strongly) and who actually made it work.
The wizard respects me because I'm the only one he could not easily subdue with a single spell. The rogue respects me because he'd have a hard time hiding from me, and because my method of disarming traps by walking into them and making whatever saving throw is required is oddly effective. The fighter and the barbarian respect me because I do many strange things that they cannot.
That's all I could ask for.
It doesn't matter if you could be more effective, as long as you look really cool doing it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0392.html)

[Pleh]

One simple monk alteration I've found quite useful (for this level of balance) is just houseruling that Flurry of Blows is allowed to stack with TWF (taking appropriate penalties for both if both are used).

"Oh, let's reduce their chances to hit even more times," you might think. Actually, just getting to roll attack that many times seems to balance out in most of my tests with it. Getting 5 attacks may mean 3 misses, but with 2 hits you're still contributing damage to the fight meaningfully. Toss Ki Strike in so UAS beats DR/Magic and you've got something going.

You might consider adding UA ACFs if only for monk. The increased options for their feats helps optimizing their tactics.

Finally, for out of combat (and even in combat), I've always been partial to the idea that Monks automatically gestalt Thief Acrobat as soon as they meet the prerequisites (basically levels 5-10). The sheer maneuverability of a thief acrobat even without magic can trivialize some trap rooms or other security measures.

[Fizban]

Are there any good suggestions to improve fighters and barbarians outside of combat. Any thoughts for monks in combat?

The smallest change that is likely to work is probably what I'll go with.
From my list:

Barbarian: Damage Reduction increases to 10/- at 20th.
Fighter: ACFs that replace feats can be taken as feats later if desired. If a feat you want isn't on the fighter list, it may be added upon request. Add Sense Motive to class skill list.
Monk: AC bonus is 2+1/2 level, monk's Flurry of Blows (or PHB2 Decisve Strike) can be used on standard action attacks, Slow Fall includes Wall Walker and Water Step (from Dungeonscape and Stormwrack) for free, Wholeness of Body is equal to your full normal hit point total. Add bonus feats at 10th, 14th, and 18th, Abundant Step can be divided into 40' increments. Quivering Palm is usable 1/day. All Monk bonus feats can be chosen from any associated with the class or otherwise deemed reasonable. Monks can use gauntlets or handwraps enhanced as weapons, and either Bracers of Armor or robes/martial arts uniforms enhanced as armor.

These aren't improvements for "outside of combat" mind you, as "outside of combat" is not a recognized core game role- Rogues do traps, and trap stuff is part of dungeoneering combat and resource management if the traps are being used correctly.
-Barbarians have Survival and the Trapkiller ACF if you want to do that (well, not from your booklist), as well as one of the detection skills.
-Sense Motive is on there for Fighters due to a couple of nifty feats that require it and an alternate skill use in Sword and Fist they might like to use (feats on your list, but not the skill use), as well as to support some ideas I have for making an actual social "encounter" system (not even outlined properly yet). Notice how stories about skilled martials so often have them reading people like a book? Yeah, Sense Motive for Fighters.
-Monk only needs a few fixes to work. The main problem with Monk is that people think of unarmored martial artists as being hard to hit, but the AC system's dependency on armor makes Monks easy to hit. Big scaling AC bonus (starting at light armor equivalent and increasing to better than heavy), boom fixed. The rest is gravy, but a dry dish still wants some gravy. I would guess that some of your martial problems have come from pounce/free movement cheese courtesy of Complete Champion (both it and Complete Mage being drastically overpowered compared to the earlier completes). You might not want to give monks the flurry on standard action attacks because of that- or you might want to even more, since it would make them unique and give multiple attacks while moving without the same power level.

There are no hard rules for participation in "non-combat encounters" being required of any class, so any problems there have actually always been problems created by the DM. If you know what kind of non-combat encounters you want to create, then you can simply add whatever you think is necessary to classes that wouldn't be able to participate.

The issue I've faced is that out of combat, at medium levels, they're usually forced to make rolls they aren't good at, and consequently don't contribute much until it's time to kill something again. I'd be interested to see what out of combat niche they could be given.
The players are never forced to roll anything unless you make it so, but this indicates you know what rolls have been a problem in the past. Make a list and split them up between the classes that the players will be using (so you don't have the Rogue's problem of one person having every skill and the rest not), and throw in +2 skill points wherever you add one or more new skills.

[VladtheLad]

I like playing wisdom focused monks but also not ignoring strength/dex and this works for me in Pathfinder: You may use wisdom to hit and you may add up to twice your strength or dexterity modifier, whichever is lowest, provided it doesn't exceed you wisdom modifier.
A more simpler but high powered version would be wisdom to hit and half level to damage (in adition to strength modfier to damage).


From my list:


Your list?

[BassoonHero]

The thing is, while you are certainly more effective by focusing on one thing (or by being a caster, of course. Everything I say implies the exclusion of any full casting class), you also have more limited options. If you are not playing at a terribly high optimization level, you can afford to be a jack-of-all trades with a core monk. Sure, if you get an unarmed swordsage you can deal more damage, but then you'd be at the mercy of anything that can force a will save. Sure, you could trip better by being an unarmed warblade, or even better, a fighter with a spiked chain. But you would, again, suck against spells, and you would have even less skill points.
The monk is not particularly versatile. It's a lot less versatile than a swordsage and no more versatile than a paladin or ranger. It might be about as versatile as a plain fighter.

Nearly everything the monk can do other than fighting can be done by most characters with the aid of cost-effective magic items that are almost universally recommended anyway. In a very low-optimization game, it's possible that a fighter will choose not to be able to deal with difficult terrain, flying opponents, or battlefield control spells, but a monk won't fare any better in such an environment.

I should mention that the Swordsage also has a good Will save and uses Wis to power its AC. In addition, the Diamond Mind discipline makes it much more resilient to magic than a monk. The swordsage is basically a strictly better monk.


One thing monks are really good at doing is resisting spells. They are the best class I know for it. high saving throws, spell resistance, good mobility, good capacity to disable the spellcaster if you manage to get close.
High saves are good, don't get me wrong. But plenty of spells shut down monks with no save, and often with no spell resistance. The best way for a monk to resist to resist these spells is with magic items that any martial character can use (or, in some cases, by taking Martial Study).

When dealing with spellcasters, defense is only half the battle. At mid levels and above, monks need flight and extraordinary senses, neither of which their class provides. They have to make do with — again — the same magic items that a fighter could use. Of course, magical flight renders the monk's mobility class features irrelevant, but it's better than standing on the ground throwing rocks. The three-feat chain of Pierce Magical Concealment is extremely costly and not even monk-specific; a fighter would have a much easier time getting it.

I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't have fun playing a monk. I like playing monks myself. But I've been doing this a long time. All the time I see a novice player choose the monk class, end up with an underpowered character (even compared to mundane fighter-types), and not have fun.

[Darth Ultron]

Are there any good suggestions to improve fighters and barbarians outside of combat. Any thoughts for monks in combat?

The smallest change that is likely to work is probably what I'll go with.

Role Playing-Focus the Out of Combat on fighters and barbarian type social lives. So things that are more military/martial/war based. Have leaders be fighters or barbarians and societies that respect and like them. A great real life example is if you know any military people, especially Marines: they can meet as total strangers and have a pure bond of good will and comradely in seconds.

Ability Checks-For Strength or Constitution. Moving a heavy rock, moving a stuck door, moving a stuck lever, opening a chest or eating a vile food or holding ones breath and so on. Not 'skill things', but ability things. Even more so where magic equals cheating...like the silly wizard can ''breathe under water all day", but that does not count for how long can they hold their breath.

Skill Checks Focused on the fighter/barbarian skills, of course.

Semi Combat This is the type of thing where each character has a club and the idea is to disarm the other person. So this would use the disarm combat rules, but not overly be 'combat'.


Any thoughts for monks in combat?


Well, it depends......



Sometimes these discussions seem like people are playing an entirely different game than I am.

Very true.

In most games, monks get the short hand just by the way the game is played. Way too many games are just pure mindless combat where two sides fight and everyone ''counts down HPs" until the PCs(always) win. It's like a bad version of the 90's Mortal Combat video game.

It's worse when the PCs ''always scout ahead", ''always have time to prepare", ''always attack with surprise" and ''always win initiative"(sigh)....but that is all a ''normal game'' to a lot of players, or even worse a big ''demand the game must be played this way." This type of rigged game often has combat that lasts only a couple rounds as the players just talk about how much damage they do.

A monk can work great in many types of combat other then the Mortal Combat one. The monk does not walk up to a foe and just ''do damage'' until they kill the foe: they should be doing all sorts of other things in combat.

The Combat Environment is a big thing that matters to monks, but also many other classes and for a better game play in general. A lot of games have all combat in black 100 foot by 100 foot areas, where each side stands around and fights all Mortal Combat style.

More of an environment does give many characters more options and more to do in combat. Even in a simple 'forest encounter', the monk can use jump/climb/balance to take the fight up into the trees. Unarmed strike means the monk can always attack a foe in range and they other have the advantage when moving.

Take a simple encounter in some woods: a monk vs five goblins(right out of the MM). So round 1 the monk will tumble/jump/climb up into the trees and move under cover. The goblins can try some ranged attacks, if the monk can't get under cover, though the monk can dodge them...and even better if he can deflect one. If the goblins choose to chase the monk up into the trees, they are at a huge disadvantage. They don't have the skills climb or balance or jump, have low dex, and can't climb with a weapon in their hand. The monk won't have any problems climbing/jumping around and attacking them. The goblins might try an just use ranged attacks, and the monk can use them too, or just stay under cover or do something else.

The above fight can take a couple minutes, and a good 20 rounds of game play. And it will be a ton more done then just ''rolling attacks and damage". It does require a good miniature battle map, complete with trees. And it does require a DM that is not a jerk: a lot of the Mortal Combat DMs will go crazy if a player does anything except the dull and boring 'mortal combat', so they will be very hostile to the player. Some of the Mortal Combat players will also be very hostile too.

The environment can really matter as a monk can hop up on a table or tumble under a wagon and attack from high ground/charge/flank or other such combination to get a foe. It's a huge difference from the Mortal Combat player that just rolls the d20 and adds their attack plus.

[ericgrau]

Sometimes these discussions seem like people are playing an entirely different game than I am.

It's a combination of higher optimization than what's common outside of internet forums and hyperbole I think.

Yeah monks (outside of D&D forums) usually do fine unless played like barbarians. Playing them like barbarians for direct damage is the biggest rookie trap. I wouldn't spend 20 rounds when all my allies are spending 2 rounds though, or I'll find the fight is over before my plan goes into motion.

Monks are the best at special attacks in the PHB because they get more attempts and because these special attacks aren't that BAB dependent. They also have the best grapple damage in the PHB. Which is important because an initiator starting a grapple merely because he has a high modifier can disable himself as much as the victim. Unless the initiator has good damage inside a grapple. But like I said a little encouragement in the form of a minor boost wouldn't hurt, especially for your group and because of how many tricks they might have figured out for other classes in those splatbooks.

[Fizban]

Your list?
My list of tweaks and brew. It's not posted since I don't want to be editing multiple instances as I add or modify stuff, it'd be a Homebrew post when I don't hang out over there anymore, and I'm pretty sure no one cares to read a giant list of tweaks and brew (especially when many posters are diametrically opposed to my minimalist and conservative approach*). So instead I just dole out the appropriate bits whenever they come up- the OP asked for those classes, and those are my tweaks for those classes. Plus further commentary and suggestions.

*Which are amusing descriptors when the document is up to, lets see. . . 95 pages. But that's mostly 'brew: spells, invocations, soulmelds, prestige classes, some lengthy equipment tables and descriptions I've typed up, and of course the splat expanded spell lists from the class tweaks. Each major "section" a player might want to read is designed to be only a page or two: a page of general bans and tweaks, a page of spell bans and tweaks, a page of miscellaneous tweaks, a page each for some unimportant subsystems I've detailed out in case they're needed, a page of core class tweaks, a page of non-core class tweaks. Everything else is specific enough that if you want to read it you know you want to read the whole thing, and as you can see from the examples, often only a few lines are needed to bring something in line with what it was meant to be.

[VladtheLad]

I am interested to see it, I 'll pm you.

[Grim Reader]

So you feel in-combat balance is good and want the martials to have more to do outside of combat. The smallest possible change is probably to give them a few more skill points and class skills. 2-3 points maybe.

However, remember that "having more skill points" is part of the shtick of some classes, such as the Rogue and Ranger. If you up the skill points of the Barbarian and Fighter, they'll lose relative position. The Rogue starts out with 4x the skill points of the fighter. If you up the Fighters skills by 2, he gets 2x as many. If you up both of them by 2 he now has 2.5 x the skill points. I'd say throw in a couple of free skill focus feats for the skill-heavy classes as they level, so they can still feel ahead in their area of competency.

As for class skills, I'd recommend just giving out 4-6 based on the character background. Fighters come in a lot of flavors. A grim ex-soldier, a wannabe knight, a naive farmboy, an ex-scribe from a sacked city, a cold-eyed mercenary. They can all come from a variety of backgrounds and have very different skill packages. Have the player do a background and then talk with him about which class skills would be appropriate.

The Monk, though...the Monk. The monk is a martial with 2/3 BaB, d8 hit points and no significant armor. In fact, armor takes away some class features. His primary offensive feature, flurry of blows incurs a hit penalty, aggravating the BaB problem. He has a speed bonus but can't move and flurry. He is awfully squishy for someone who has to get into melee.

He needs Str to hit at all, Con to have any chance of surviving, Dex and Wis for defenses. So its likely that the real martials can afford better to-hit and damage stats. His unarmed damage lags a proper weapon. Etc, etc.

Also he is off-fluff with the others.

There is no small change fix for the monk. The class at the very least needs major structural engineering, possibly being burned to the ground and rebuilt. You can substitute fixed classes such as the Brawler or the Quinggong Monk, but they are balanced against Pathfinders generally more powerful classes.

Quinggong on a 3.5 Monk may work out though.

Generally I'd say the smallest possible change is friends don't let friends play monks.

[ericgrau]

This is risking becoming a 50 pages monk thread that goes in circles.

Back to martial utility in general, 101 cheap magic items does work very well. I've out-utilitied full casters this way. Ones who didn't spec out 100 items nor 100 other plans anyway. And using the magic item tables as written often gives a bunch of cheap utility items in treasure piles. It's a common DM temptation to give out a big sword and be done with it instead. You could always amplify it and give out even more random low cost treasure, or hand pick out a bunch of low cost utility items yourself. Just look at DMG or MIC tables sorted by cost and start at the top.

[blackwindbears]

Well all of this has been very helpful. I think I'm gonna add 2 skill points to the fighter and barbarian. Add a few class skills for them. As well as make sure ability checks, like, ever happen.

Monk is going to either directly get wisdom to attack and damage rolls, or a feat that allows them to add it.

[ericgrau]

Monk is going to either directly get wisdom to attack and damage rolls, or a feat that allows them to add it.
That doesn't help trip checks though. Does that apply to grapple checks? If it's only direct damage then it becomes even more of a trap to still not keep up with a barbarian. If it's an automatic choice then I wouldn't make it a feat tax, just give it to him.

Wis to attack rolls, damage and all special attack rolls could do it.

PCs that don't like the nightmare of grapple rules can still stunning fist ok. Neither stunning fist or damage alone is good, but both together with wis as the primary stat could be nice. And at level 6 there's kama tripping. Actually with or without a wis boost to special attacks, I'd be a little afraid of stunlocks. "Well, that cool monster only got to act for 1 round." Which might not be terrible. Most things die in 2-3 rounds anyway. Still I'd boost the special attacks too so the monk has options.

[blackwindbears]

Wis to attack rolls, damage and all special attack rolls could do it.


Sounds perfect. Thanks

[VladtheLad]

Well all of this has been very helpful. I think I'm gonna add 2 skill points to the fighter and barbarian. Add a few class skills for them. As well as make sure ability checks, like, ever happen.

Monk is going to either directly get wisdom to attack and damage rolls, or a feat that allows them to add it.

That does seem to be the best way to go about it, if you follow your specifications.
Making martials as powerful as spellcasters in combat is doable, it's much harder to make them as good out of combat.

Perhaps this is also a possibility, check the social talents from here https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/vigilante/ and allow and grant the ones that make sense for fighter or barbarian to have (many of them are about disguises and what not). On the same time you could say that at high levels, full casters get social disadvantages or drawbacks or taboos like some from here https://www.d20pfsrd.com/occult-adventures/occult-classes/medium/.
Examples:
you must not pass up the opportunity to learn something new and significant, when that opportunity is directly present
You must follow a paladin or antipaladin code as appropriate for your deity.

As an aside you also mentioned awarding items as a dm. How do you do that? Do you wing it and do what feels appropriate?

[Mordaedil]

To fix fighters, I'd probably just change the name of the warblade, reduce the hit die to d10 and give them heavy armor proficiency.

For monks, I'd gestalt monk and swordsage.

[BassoonHero]

Take a simple encounter in some woods: a monk vs five goblins(right out of the MM). So round 1 the monk will tumble/jump/climb up into the trees and move under cover. The goblins can try some ranged attacks, if the monk can't get under cover, though the monk can dodge them...and even better if he can deflect one. If the goblins choose to chase the monk up into the trees, they are at a huge disadvantage. They don't have the skills climb or balance or jump, have low dex, and can't climb with a weapon in their hand. The monk won't have any problems climbing/jumping around and attacking them. The goblins might try an just use ranged attacks, and the monk can use them too, or just stay under cover or do something else.
Let's break this down.

The "advantage" that the monk has here is that he has taken ranks in the Climb and Jump skills. These are very common class skills; any martial character could have them. The monk gets four skill points, which may increase the likelihood that he will have these skills, but Int is his fifth-most-important ability; if it's higher than an 8, then it will be at the expense of effectiveness in other areas.

All that aside, what is the monk trying to accomplish? Suppose he spends his turn climbing a tree. Now he is out of melee range. What's his next move? Is he going to plink away with a light crossbow versus five goblins with their own ranged weapons? You say that "The monk won't have any problems climbing/jumping around and attacking them". Where is he going to attack them? Where they are, on the ground? But then what was the point of climbing a tree? Or did you suppose that the goblins would drop their weapons and climb up after him? You yourself point out all the reasons that's a bad idea. Goblins aren't stupid; there's a good chance they're smarter than the monk is.

And where is the rest of the party? The monk has scarpered and left them to fight without him. I doubt that the wizard with no Climb ranks and a Str penalty is going to follow the monk up into the trees. The monk has no real way to help his comrades escape. By climbing away from combat, he's only made things worse for his companions. Or are we supposing that this is a solo encounter? If so, what is the monk's objective and how does climbing a tree help him to accomplish it?

1. Attacked by goblins.
2. Climb a tree.
3. ???
4. Profit.

This is the crux of the issue: doing interesting things is all well and good, but if it doesn't contribute to accomplishing the character's goals (or the party's) then it's pointless. I think that you have a badly distorted idea of how most people here play the game. It's not about two characters standing next to each other and rolling dice until one runs out of hit points. Mobility matters, tactics matter, versatility matters. But they matter insofar as they help a character to accomplish their objectives. This is the monk's essential problem -- all of the nifty class features don't do much to help him accomplish his objectives.

I want to be clear that I enjoy playing monks. With some optimization, they can be a fine addition to a low-powered party. And I want other people to enjoy playing monks, too. Too often I see a novice player choose the monk class because they imagine doing the kind of thing you describe above. Too often I see the player disappointed because the monk class doesn't provide the tools they need to do it effectively. With the right ACFs, multiclassing, and prestige classes, an experienced player can overcome these deficiencies. For a novice, though, I'll recommend the swordsage every time. If you must present the monk class as an option for new players, then the least you can do is give them full BAB, 6 skill points/level, and a generous stat array and/or other ways to reduce MAD.