Are Monks underpowered, balanced, or broken? [Archive] - Page 2

Xeon

2007-10-05, 03:23 PM

I think what he is trying to get at is that since the rulebooks include guidelines for creating your own magic items, and I believe guidelines for creating your own spells, then it's not home brewing in the same sense as a new race, class, or feat. That's just my take on it, I could be wrong..

You hit the nail on the head but once again its only the way I see it. No need to argue about it.

And my apologies for the "fast-talk" comment; it was intended mostly humorously. I should have thrown in a smiley.

No problem. Its hard to convey the intention of written words especialy whilst in the middle of a heated debate.

Wow, apparently you've yet to play in a well written game system.

What exactly do you mean by this? I don't understand. I was under the Impression that we were all playing the same system here (at least as far as this disscussion goes)

To kill something, you have to deal enough damage to reduce it below 0 and let it bleed to death.

To subdue, you need to do Nonlethal damage equal and above it's current hit points.

So we're talking the same numbers here, more or less.

Not nessisarily. Yes if you want to knock some on unconsice than you have to deal subdual damage but that's not the only way to incapacitate some one. If we were going to get into a fight and instead of knocking you out i put you in some crazy unescapeable ninja hold, I would think that you would be pretty much incapacitated even though you were still conscious. To go a step farther its not even nessacary to incapacitate some one to win the fight if the bard charms the big bad wolf (or whatever your fighting) and talks him into just leaving the group alone than you have succesfully by-passed the encounter.

First, if you click on a thread explicitly discussing class balance, don't be upset to see it.
Second, the game is not balanced. It is built by human beings and human beings make mistakes. It's what we do. You can't assume that just because a product is marketed it is flawless.

Joe Shmoe is no good at baseball. he can't throw he can't bat etc. because of this he says that basebal is an inferior game to curling which he is good at is that a valid basis for an argument. I don't mind people stateing their opinons, as my mother has often said everyone has the right to one but just because someone can't min max a monk as well as they can a fighter dosen't mean that monk is weak. Heck i can never seem to make a decent cleric dose that mean that cleric is a weak class, no. The problem that i have is with people that say well i can make an X that can do this this and this better than a monk (or whatever) so monk is weak.

Xeon

2007-10-05, 03:29 PM

I agree with Spike, that's exactly what happened with my first third-ed character ever. Issues of inherent capability aside, the monk is a tough class to build AND roleplay.

Hear,Hear

Oh, and while we're near the subject, has anyone actually seen a stunning fist actually succeed? I never have...

All the time. If your hitting things with low fort saves and try to up your DC a bit it can be quite useful.

Thoughtbot360

2007-10-05, 03:36 PM

I did find this twink build (http://http://www.nuklearpower.com/redmage25.php) (its requires a lot of Splat and it used 3rd edition rules)

If you follow this formula, your monk will be able charge from 320 feet away, and deliver a flying kick which will do 2d12 + 40 points of damage and leave the target stunned for one round, and nauseated and unable to move for the next. I’m assuming your monk is 15th level. It’s not impossible to make this work at lower levels, you probably just won’t have the same range or damage. It’ll still be impressive though.

Spells needed:
Cast Divine Wisdom, empowered, at the beginning of the day. This will give 6 points of Wisdom. DW is from Relics and Rituals; the spell is not necessary, but very useful, since WIS adds to both stun DC and the monk's AC.

Essential items:
Potions of True Strike
Monk's Belt (for Haste)
Sandals of the Tiger (from S&F) with layered Boots of Striding and Springing. (This second power will cost you double because it is added to a slotted item (see the DMG), but since the power costs all of 1000 gp for a mage to create, you'll end up striding for 2000 gp. The best deal in the game). Ki Straps (from Sword and Fist)

Feats required:
Pain Touch
Power Attack

This is how it all breaks down:

Round 1: The monk hastes himself (monk's belt)
Round1 partial: The monk drinks a potion of true strike.

Round 2: The monk launches a 320 foot flying kick. Her base move is 80; the striding makes it 160. Doubled (for a charge), this is 320.
The flying kick (based on the Sandals) does double damage, so 1d12 + 10-15 (power attack) + 5 (strength bonus) * 2 = 2d12 + 40.

But the real fun is in the stun. Save DC is 10 + half monk's level (7 or 8) + wisdom bonus (5 at least, see Divine Wisdom), + 5 (Ki straps). Our monk, who started with an 18 wisdom (raised to 24 by the DW), delivers a stun with a DC of 10 + 8 + 7 (wis) + 5 = 30.

When they're stunned, they're out of combat for 2 rounds, because of the pain touch feat. What's great about this tactic is that you can basically do it once every round, since your save DC is 30 for the stuns. The extra damage and distance for the charge is neat, but what really hurts is having a monk keep half of the opposition stunned / nauseated during a fight.

Also note that anyone who fails that 30 DC save is vulnerable to sneak attack damage from rogues. Have your rogue delay until just after the monk goes for maximum Destroying the DM’s Campaign Effect.

Apparently, this monk minmaxed wisdom (18) leaving his dexterity and strength something to be desired, so he relies on for it with true strike potions (Couldn't he get a wand and cross-class some UMD ranks? Oh, right! 3.0 edition!) and outside buffs (fun fact: all monks rely on Greater Magic fang...does that mean they have to travel with a Druid?). Still, there are a lot of monsters that can make a 30 fort save. A nice idea, though.

Dr. Weasel

2007-10-05, 03:48 PM

Sosa excerpt

That's actually not all that great. At all.

My 15th level 13 strength Barbarian with a club and the standard Shock-Trooper routine does 1d6+46 damage without Rage or any optimization beyond the standard feats.

Arbitrarity

2007-10-05, 03:55 PM

That's like... a negative quantity of optimization, except for shock trooper/leap attack.

Crow

2007-10-05, 04:13 PM

That's actually not all that great. At all.

My 15th level 13 strength Barbarian with a club and the standard Shock-Trooper routine does 1d6+46 damage without Rage or any optimization beyond the standard feats.

Nothing you post will mean anything until you ditch the "Shock-Trooper routine." That you call it "standard" does little to back up your "un-optimized" credentials. Not every barbarian takes Shock-Trooper and Leap Attack.

I'm not trying to get involved here, but maybe you guys should make your comparisons in a core-only environment?

Zincorium

2007-10-05, 04:32 PM

Nothing you post will mean anything until you ditch the "Shock-Trooper routine." That you call it "standard" does little to back up your "un-optimized" credentials. Not every barbarian takes Shock-Trooper and Leap Attack.

I'm not trying to get involved here, but maybe you guys should make your comparisons in a core-only environment?

That doesn't actually help the monk that much, shock trooper is nice, but it doesn't create the imbalance.

Roog

2007-10-05, 05:28 PM

Joe Shmoe is no good at baseball. he can't throw he can't bat etc. because of this he says that basebal is an inferior game to curling which he is good at is that a valid basis for an argument. I don't mind people stateing their opinons, as my mother has often said everyone has the right to one but just because someone can't min max a monk as well as they can a fighter dosen't mean that monk is weak. Heck i can never seem to make a decent cleric dose that mean that cleric is a weak class, no. The problem that i have is with people that say well i can make an X that can do this this and this better than a monk (or whatever) so monk is weak.

So who do you think is qualified to make a judgment on Monks power level?

horseboy

2007-10-05, 06:04 PM

What exactly do you mean by this? I don't understand. I was under the Impression that we were all playing the same system here (at least as far as this disscussion goes)

D&D is horribly lopsided, very poorly playtested, and in general takes more effort to make something "unbroken" than to make something that works. If you don't see how bad it is, then apparently it's all you've been playing. I recommend you expand into some other systems. A man who's eaten everyday at McDonalds will thing McD's is good, because he doesn't know any better.

Xeon

2007-10-05, 06:26 PM

D&D is horribly lopsided, very poorly playtested, and in general takes more effort to make something "unbroken" than to make something that works. If you don't see how bad it is, then apparently it's all you've been playing. I recommend you expand into some other systems. A man who's eaten everyday at McDonalds will thing McD's is good, because he doesn't know any better.

D&D is far from all that I play. In fact i probably play less D&D than any other systems. I'm fairly well versed in Exalted, Gurps, Earth Dawn, and some other D20 systems. I have also played a little Mage and Changeling, ITL, Hero, and a few other things.

So who do you think is qualified to make a judgment on Monks power level?

I have no problem with anyone expressing their opinion as i said before it just seems to me that some the arguements are flawed. Just because someone can't see a monk doing as well as a crazy min/maxed Charecter doesn'e mean that it is not a good class. All I'm saying is that perhaps people just arn't looking at monk properly.

tainsouvra

2007-10-05, 06:59 PM

All I'm saying is that perhaps people just arn't looking at monk properly. The problem with that logic is that it takes a suspension of disbelief to maintain. At a certain point, you have to just say "if it's never been done, and there's no evidence that it can be done, and it's been attempted thousands of times, maybe it really just can't be done." And yes, there have literally been thousands of attempts, printed, posted, or published for public scrutiny, that have failed to make a monk as powerful as other available options.

Yes, it's technically possible that there's a way, and that several years of effort by countless people has failed to uncover it. It's also technically possible that gravity doesn't exist, and that pure chance and massive miscalculation accounts for everything we have experienced that indicates a law of gravity. But, well, it's just not very likely.

Sometimes, you just have to go with Occam. While your statement isn't impossible, it's so unbelievably unlikely that it just can't be taken seriously anymore.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-05, 09:06 PM

So, Fun fact: Monks are actually better at disarming than fighters for at least 6 levels. I did some number crunching, and this was the result:

Assumptions:
The only numbers that matter for this comparison are BAB. Everything else is ignored, because it can be matched on both sides equally. If necessary, I can go into greater detail as to why other modifiers are irrelevant for this comparison. I can also explain the gritty details of how you calculate the cumalitve chance of success, but I would prefer that you just look it up yourself, as the math is not exactly simple.

Level 11:
Both the monk and the fighter are attempting to disarm an 11 BAB character. Monk, fighter, and target are assumed to have the same misc. bonuses to disarm roll, such as I. Disarm, weapon choice, etc. So we are effectively comparing BAB. Level 11 is the level at which the monk is most likely to be better at disarming than the fighter, so I did the math for level 11 first.

Fighter's full attack:
1st attack (47.5% disarm chance)
2nd attack (26.25% disarm chance)
3rd attack (11.25% disarm chance)
cumulative chance of disarm with full attack = 66.3736%

Monk's full attack:
1st-3rd attack (34% disarm chance)
4th attack (16.5% disarm chance)
cumulative chance of disarm with full attack = 80.82707%

At level 20, the second set of numbers I crunched, the monk's advantage becomes statistically irrelevant, with only a +1% better chance of disarming with a full attack. I have run the numbers for level 17, but I imagine that is where the fighter closes the gap, as that is when the monk's BAB is 5 short of the fighter's.

numbers for level 20:
Fighter: 47.5%/26.25%/11.25%/2.5% (66.9374%)
Monk: 26.25%/26.25%/26.25%/11.25%/2.5% (68.002%)

EDIT -Not that disarming is effective, or fills a party role.

Dausuul

2007-10-05, 10:07 PM

That assumes the character attempting the disarm is in a position to make a full attack, which will only be the case about half the time.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-05, 10:54 PM

That assumes the character attempting the disarm is in a position to make a full attack, which will only be the case about half the time.

Not that that is at all relevant, but that is not true in my experience. In combats I have seen, full attacks are happening every round but the first one.

Kaelik

2007-10-06, 01:25 PM

Not that that is at all relevant, but that is not true in my experience. In combats I have seen, full attacks are happening every round but the first one.

Then your DM needs to play the vast majority of his Monsters smarter. (All of them before level 6. Who on Earth would sit around making single attacks, against someone with more attacks?)

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-06, 07:32 PM

Then your DM needs to play the vast majority of his Monsters smarter. (All of them before level 6. Who on Earth would sit around making single attacks, against someone with more attacks?)

You aren't making any sense. Most monsters that do the attacking thing want to full attack just as much as the fighter does. And even if they only have one attack/round, moving away provokes. AoOs are more likely to hit than iteratives.

Not to mention that if we are talking about a foe that is wielding a weapon, they are probably a humanoid with class levels anyway. The target number in fact assumes a full BAB opponent. Which has every reason to stand in place and make full attacks.

And I run my encounters at the appropriate level of intelligence for the creatures involved, thank you very much.

Dr. Weasel

2007-10-06, 08:15 PM

Nothing you post will mean anything until you ditch the "Shock-Trooper routine." That you call it "standard" does little to back up your "un-optimized" credentials. Not every barbarian takes Shock-Trooper and Leap Attack.

I'm not trying to get involved here, but maybe you guys should make your comparisons in a core-only environment?
I was just trying to illustrate how little effort has to go into matching the example's optimization without the massive item consumption and with more acceptable and accessable sources.

Dode

2007-10-06, 09:25 PM

So, Fun fact: Monks are actually better at disarming than fighters for at least 6 levels. I did some number crunching, and this was the result:

Assumptions:
The only numbers that matter for this comparison are BAB. Everything else is ignored, because it can be matched on both sides equally. If necessary, I can go into greater detail as to why other modifiers are irrelevant for this comparison. I can also explain the gritty details of how you calculate the cumalitve chance of success, but I would prefer that you just look it up yourself, as the math is not exactly simple. You're going to have to explain it then, because those are some shaky assumptions. Especially the "because it can be matched on both sides equally" assumption. Because the Monk comes prepackaged with brutal penalties to disarm that cannot be bought off.

The Monk's unarmed strike (it's primary attack) counts as a light weapon, which imposes a -4 to any attempt to disarm. Fighters meanwhile have the luxury of using any two-handed weapon (which lends a +4 bonus) when disarming. Not to mention the polearms that give a Fighter an additional bonus to disarm along with some reach on top of that. So right off the bat Fighters beat Monks at disarming by a +8 bonus, unless the Monk switches to a quarterstaff, the only two-handed weapon a Monk is automatically proficient with.

Oh wait, the quarterstaff is a double weapon, and

In the case of the quarterstaff, each end counts as a separate weapon for the purpose of using the flurry of blows ability.
-if it wants to use a flurry of disarms, it's going to have a +0 bonus at best as opposed to the Fighter's +2 with a one-handed flail, a +4 with any two handed weapon and a +6 with either a ranseur or a heavy flail. The Monk could boost that up to a +4 to disarm, but that would mean tossing away two attacks to do so.

This leads to the hilarious situation of the Monk's special exotic weapons that give bonuses to disarming. Despite the fact they're light weapons. A -2 instead of a -4 to all my disarms? What a well designed feature for the Monk!

Your example of Monk's marginal disarm superiority only works on the assumption that the Fighter handicaps himself by exclusively using the terrible, useless weapons that the monk is proficient with to disarm his opponents.

I mean, if Martial Weapon Proficiency isn't on the list of 'power gaming feats that skew the true comparison between fighter and monk'.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-06, 10:00 PM

You're going to have to explain it then, because those are some shaky assumptions. Especially the "because it can be matched on both sides equally" assumption. Because the Monk comes prepackaged with brutal penalties to disarm that cannot be bought off.

The Monk's unarmed strike (it's primary attack) [...]

This is irrelevant, because the only reason the monk uses his unarmed strikes are for damage dealing purposes. Disarms don't deal damage, and thus there is no reason to use them to disarm.

Oh wait, the quarterstaff is a double weapon, and

Quote:
In the case of the quarterstaff, each end counts as a separate weapon for the purpose of using the flurry of blows ability.

I did not realize you could not 2H a staff while flurrying, however, this is irrelevant, because there are feats a monk can take to gain flurry with non-traditional weapons. So it doesn't matter very much, as we are assuming that both the fighter and the monk are going to take feats to make them better at disarming.

-if it wants to use a flurry of disarms, it's going to have a +0 bonus at best as opposed to the Fighter's +2 with a one-handed flail, a +4 with any two handed weapon and a +6 with either a ranseur or a heavy flail. The Monk could boost that up to a +4 to disarm, but that would mean tossing away two attacks to do so.

I couldn't find a feat to let you flurry with any of the two-handed weapons that grant a +2 bonus, so the fighter does gain a [statistically insignificant] bonus from that.

Your example of Monk's marginal disarm superiority only works on the assumption that the Fighter handicaps himself by exclusively using the terrible, useless weapons that the monk is proficient with to disarm his opponents.

As I have shown, this is not the case.

That settles the variance based on weapon type.

Other possible variance-

"Fighters have a higher strength"
-A fighter's strength is no higher a priority than a monk's wisdom, and thus they will wind up at least equal. A monk is actually likely to have a higher wisdom than the fighter's strenght, as it is more important for a monk than strength is for a fighter. Thus we assume an equal attack stat.

"You didn't include the bonus from Improved Disarm, or account for locked gauntlets"
-Again, both sides are assumed to have I. Disarm, and so I didn't count it becase both sides are equal. Generally you don't even try to disarm the guy using a locked gauntlet, but the monk is at a clear advantage here, because the only way that is going to work is if you roll exceptionally high compared to your opponent. The monk is rolling more often during the levels in which his disarming is 'strong'.

Dode

2007-10-06, 10:51 PM

I did not realize you could not 2H a staff while flurrying, however, this is irrelevant, because there are feats a monk can take to gain flurry with non-traditional weapons. So it doesn't matter very much, as we are assuming that both the fighter and the monk are going to take feats to make them better at disarming.A Monk needs to take Simple Weapon Proficiency, Weapon Focus (Longspear) and then Serpent Strike (and spending it's two bonus feats, naturally) in order to even come close to (but not quite) match the bonus that a Fighter with Imp. Disarm gets. Some equality. And I'm not sure I'd call that cost 'irrelevent' though if I was building a monk.

Also, are you sure you want to make this a contest between who can dedicate more feats into optimizing disarm, Fighter or Monk? I'm not sure if you know this, but the Monk isn't going to win a feat contest with a Fighter.

Because a Monk isn't going to be able to get Greater Weapon Focus, Melee Weapon Mastery etc. and other feats that turn that +2 advantage to disarm into a +3 then a +5 looong before a Monk gets near Greater Flurry. The original argument that it comes down to "pure BAB" on Fighter vs. Monk disarm doesn't work, because the Fighter has access to superior weapons and feats when it comes to disarming, both of which you refuse to take into account.

I couldn't find a feat to let you flurry with any of the two-handed weapons that grant a +2 bonus, so the fighter does gain a [statistically insignificant] bonus from that. +2 is "insignificant"? That's an extra 10% off a d20, the equivalent of having +4 Strength and an extra 50% power to Improved Disarm. If we're trying to prove the Monk's disarm efficiency to the decimal point, I think a +2 bonus (much less the actual bonus the Fighter will beat a Monk by) is very significant.

Zincorium

2007-10-06, 11:15 PM

I did not realize you could not 2H a staff while flurrying, however, this is irrelevant, because there are feats a monk can take to gain flurry with non-traditional weapons. So it doesn't matter very much, as we are assuming that both the fighter and the monk are going to take feats to make them better at disarming.

That is precisely relevant, as the fighter has a lot more feats to use and qualifies for them earlier.

"Fighters have a higher strength"
-A fighter's strength is no higher a priority than a monk's wisdom, and thus they will wind up at least equal. A monk is actually likely to have a higher wisdom than the fighter's strenght, as it is more important for a monk than strength is for a fighter. Thus we assume an equal attack stat.

This is, I'm sorry, blatant misdirection. Most fighters have, at max, two stats that they need a score of above 13 in to be effective: strength and constitution, and a fighter can afford to dump constitution more than a monk can due to higher base hit dice. So strength can, without drawbacks, be maximised. That is just not true for monks, how you can say it is with a straight face blows me away.

"You didn't include the bonus from Improved Disarm, or account for locked gauntlets"
-Again, both sides are assumed to have I. Disarm, and so I didn't count it becase both sides are equal. Generally you don't even try to disarm the guy using a locked gauntlet, but the monk is at a clear advantage here, because the only way that is going to work is if you roll exceptionally high compared to your opponent. The monk is rolling more often during the levels in which his disarming is 'strong'.

Your argument is that the monk is good because you can discount whatever you want?!

Truly, I was taking your calculations seriously only as a theoretical comparison. If you claim that this is indeed the real-world situation, then I have to profess a complete loss of your credibility from my perspective.

You can't cherry pick whatever modifiers help your side, disregard factors that might make a difference, and then claim mathematical superiority based on the heavily skewed data.

triforcel

2007-10-06, 11:16 PM

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-06, 11:28 PM

Kaelik

2007-10-06, 11:40 PM

You aren't making any sense. Most monsters that do the attacking thing want to full attack just as much as the fighter does. And even if they only have one attack/round, moving away provokes. AoOs are more likely to hit than iteratives.

Not to mention that if we are talking about a foe that is wielding a weapon, they are probably a humanoid with class levels anyway. The target number in fact assumes a full BAB opponent. Which has every reason to stand in place and make full attacks.

And I run my encounters at the appropriate level of intelligence for the creatures involved, thank you very much.

Excepting that without Spirit Lion Totem you can expect more monsters to have pounce the otherwise. And many creatures have SLA that should be used, and make more sense then standing around engaged with melee combatants. Add in that any humanoids with class levels you face f=should figure out pretty quick that charging and withdrawing is a better strategy then getting hit twice as often.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-06, 11:44 PM

Monsters with pounce don't get targeted with the disarm treatment anyway. Same goes for SLA users. Humanoids have no reason not to stay in melee because once the party has iteratives, so will they.

Scenario: (L6)
Fighter moves up to Orc Warrior
Orc can:
A) Attack Twice
B) Withdraw
C) Attack Once, then move away, taking an AoO

The obviouis choice: A

Back to the whole "monks are better at disarming" thing.

There isn't much argument, as I was mostly just entertaining myself crunching numbers, but what argument there is boils down to this:

Disarming is a weak option to specialize in.
Disarming is sometimes useful.
Monks don't have to specialize to be good at disarming.
Therefore, in those situations where a foe needs to be disarmed, the monk has the upper hand.

Dode

2007-10-07, 12:03 AM

I'm no statistician, so I can't really crunch the numbers, but the monk will typically have more attacks per round than a fighter will. More attacks means a greater chance of rolling a nat 20, and that usually means an auto success, at least in all the games I've played. So even thought the fighter can take greater weapon focus, etc. the extra shot at a nat 20 should counteract that, at least to an extent. A fighter can take Improved Critical for a weapon, (that may already have a 19-20 critical range). That and a basic Power Attack/Cleave/Greater Cleave combo means the Fighter can hit more accurately, for more damage, and when it knocks a guy down, they start getting free attacks. He can do all that AND take Greater Weapon Focus/etc :)

Kaelik

2007-10-07, 03:31 AM

Monsters with pounce don't get targeted with the disarm treatment anyway. Same goes for SLA users. Humanoids have no reason not to stay in melee because once the party has iteratives, so will they.

Scenario: (L6)
Fighter moves up to Orc Warrior
Orc can:
A) Attack Twice
B) Withdraw
C) Attack Once, then move away, taking an AoO

The obviouis choice: A

A) I was under the impression we were talking about before level 6.
B) That Humanoids with class levels (IE NPCs that could easily be PCs) generally end up full attacking (and getting full attacked in turn) is a much different statement then what you said, which is "In combats I have seen, full attacks are happening every round but the first one."

That would appear to apply to every combat, which would mean that your DM either A) Never uses monsters that might benefit from movement or spellcasters/SLA users or B) Plays them very poorly.

If A) is the case then you aren't really playing D&D anyway so it doesn't matter.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-07, 03:48 AM

If A) is the case then you aren't really playing D&D anyway so it doesn't matter.

A DM's preference in monster selection has very little weight in terms of whether or not he is playing D&D. The fact that I run 85-90% melee encounters does not make me any worse of a DM, and it certainly doesn't make my games 'not D&D'.

Dode

2007-10-07, 04:30 AM

Yes, a +2 is insignificant. The (dubious)fact you can't technically 2-hand a quarterstaff is the only problem with this comparison, though, as a monk isn't spending any effort whatsoever to be able to disarm better than the fighter at 11th level. Because the choice at level 6 is I Trip or I Disarm. One of which a monk is hard pressed not to suck at.

Having looked over flurry and quarterstaff and the disarm rules, I don't see how a quarterstaff is any less two-handed for purposes of disarm, as disarm only cares whether the weapon in question is a two-handed weapon, which a quarterstaff is. Nothing in the description of flurry states that you are suddenly wielding the staff one-handed. Not quite. A quarterstaff is and always has been a double weapon. Double weapons are treated as two seperate weapons, one end counting as a one-handed weapon and the off-hand as a light weapon. But Monks don't suffer off-hand penalties when making a flurry.

The description again:
"When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus × 1½ or ×½) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks, whether she wields a weapon in one or both hands...

...In the case of the quarterstaff, each end counts as a separate weapon for the purpose of using the flurry of blows ability"

Unless the Monk is effectively wielding two two-handed-weapons, one in each hand, the quarterstaff functions as the double weapon it is and always was. A double weapon can be wielded as a two-handed weapon, but clearly you can't during a flurry of blows.

Which means a quarterstaff flurry lends a +0 to disarm checks. And that the fighter probably doesn't even need to pick up the Imp. Disarm feat to beat the Monk at disarm. Just a ranseur to avoid the AoO.

In the end, the quarterstaff is merely slightly less useless then the rest of the Monk's arsenal. But the idea of giving Imp. Disarm to a class that can only use light weapons was a massive failure in class design.

In order for your fighter to gain that extra edge, he has to go down a feat tree generally considered to be a "Trap." The monk gets all of his stuff for free, w/o having to take that crappy C. Expertise feat. Well, considering the entire Monk class is generally considered to be a "Trap", the Fighter can have a bit of legroom. Now this Fighter in question, who I call Spite-tron, can at level 11 not only beat a Monk at disarm, but also power attack, greater cleave and shock troop it up with the rest of them. And it's not like the Greater Weapon Focus/Melee Weapon Mastery/etc feats don't stop with utterly trumping the Monk's ability to Disarm.

And the Fighter doesn't have to spend 3 feats to be able to disarm with a weapon useful for disarming. :smallsmile:
I would, however, like to reiterate that this doesn't help the monk's case, as disarming A) isn't very effective, and B) a fighter can be better at it by wasting a bunch of feats

It is also worth noting that monk is only better at disarming for a very specific range of levels.The Monk is better at disarming only as long as the Fighter makes a conscious effort not to be better then the monk at it. And, to the contrary, the Monk can be sort-of equal to the Fighter in disarming, only if he wastes a far more significant amount of feats doing it (since Fighters get feats like candy).

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-07, 04:43 AM

The Monk is better at disarming only as long as the Fighter doesn't makes a conscious effort not to be better then the monk at it.

Again, the monk is better than the fighter at disarming only by virtue of getting flurry of blows and having improved disarm for free. It isn't worth spending feats to get I. Disarm, but monk gets it for free. A fighter could choose to take I. Disarm, true, but those feats are better spent elsewhere. A monk is choosing between Improved Trip and Improved Disarm. I. Disarm is the obvious choice, and thus there really isn't one.

In short, a monk is better at disarming because he is forced to take Improved Disarm instead of something useful.

Also, a quarterstaff is still a two-handed weapon, regardless of its status as a double weapon when flurrying with it. For that matter, a double bladed sword is also a two-handed weapon for purposes of disarming. It is a matter of the size of the weapon, not the way it is being wielded. However, I can see why you would it interpret it differently, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. The matter is purely academic anyway.

Keld Denar

2007-10-08, 09:28 AM

Again, the monk is better than the fighter at disarming only by virtue of getting flurry of blows and having improved disarm for free. It isn't worth spending feats to get I. Disarm, but monk gets it for free. A fighter could choose to take I. Disarm, true, but those feats are better spent elsewhere. A monk is choosing between Improved Trip and Improved Disarm. I. Disarm is the obvious choice, and thus there really isn't one.

Actually, I'd say I Trip would be a better feat most of the time. Since trip is dependant only on 4 qualities (str, size, stability, feat), which a monk could spend features to gain advantage, whereas disarm is dependant on 5 (str, size, weapon size, BAB, feat) 2 of which the monk tends to be at a disadvantage. Plus, most things that can be disarmed (medium sized humanoids wielding weapons) can also be tripped, whereas not everything that can be tripped can be disarmed (natural weapon eg. lizardmen).

Also, on full attacks. A lot of big things (giants, ogres w/ levels, etc) and even NPC fighter types are gonna want to stand and trade full attacks, because chances are, they are as good or better at it than you. (more hp, more str, good BAB, power attack).

trehek

2007-10-08, 10:30 AM

I've had a pair of extremely succesful monk characters recently after making the observation that they benefit greatly from a dip into Cleric or Druid, while still keeping the feel of the monk with the monk abilities as the main powers of the class.

One of my monks built with a cleric dip of a few levels was the most succesful tank I've ever played. He could run up to monsters from 100ft, grow in size and hold them at bay while the party lobbed ranged attacks from behind. His damage was not spectacular, but was above the limit where the monsters could ignore him (which is the problem with many tank builds). His AC went way above 50 when he reached level 20, which meant he could stand in front of most monsters suffering only boredom.

The second monk build I had was a very succesful melee damage dealer, who combined the use of Stunning Fist with abilities gained from feats, such as Brutal Strike and Touch of Golden Ice and another one which i can't remember now :smallbiggrin: . When struck, a victim had to make four separate fortitude saves to avoid being stunned, dazed, staggered and afflicted. Building on the strong points of the class, the character was very effective at disabling and/or weakening opponents. This build also made quite a large dip into Cleric, mainly to buff his chances to hit while using high power attack.

tainsouvra

2007-10-08, 12:27 PM

Amusing trains of thought going on...summarizing a couple arguments I've seen here in sequence, I think the humor of this should become apparent. Monks aren't worse-off than Fighters. Monks can disarm about as well as Fighters if both take the right feats. Fighters are less likely to take the disarming feats, since they have more powerful options readily available. Therefore, Monks usually disarm better than Fighters. ...of course, #3 really should be hinting to people that #1 isn't true, if you ponder it a bit.

Fax Celestis

2007-10-08, 12:29 PM

Dausuul

2007-10-08, 02:36 PM

The problem with level dips is the monk's multiclassing problems. Either you stay straight monk, find an obscure feat that lets you multiclass, or multiclass and never look back. Unfortunately, this usually relegates the monk mostly to the third position, since people use it as a dip class and move on with their careers.

Or start out as something else (cleric, say) and then go into monk.

Style

2007-10-08, 02:50 PM

Well i think monk are an enjoyable class... if the DM can create some situation that help the monk to shine, but its not the powerplayer preferred class :smalltongue: in the fact.

trehek

2007-10-08, 03:37 PM

Or start out as something else (cleric, say) and then go into monk.

That's actually what I did in both of the above examples.

triforcel

2007-10-08, 09:52 PM

...of course, #3 really should be hinting to people that #1 isn't true, if you ponder it a bit.

Not quite, because when a monk has to choose between improved trip or improved disarm at level six, where as a fighter has most likely hundreds of feats to choose from if you have access to all of the "splat books" so yes, some of those feats will be more powerful than improved disarm. That doesn't mean that the monk is worse off than the fighter.

Armads

2007-10-09, 12:01 AM

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-09, 12:15 AM

Dode

2007-10-09, 12:20 AM

Not quite, because when a monk has to choose between improved trip or improved disarm at level six, where as a fighter has most likely hundreds of feats to choose from if you have access to all of the "splat books" so yes, some of those feats will be more powerful than improved disarm. That doesn't mean that the monk is worse off than the fighter. Uh, yes it does. A Fighter can be better at disarming (and everything else) then a monk using core feats. It can be far better at disarming and everything else if you let additional material.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-09, 12:33 AM

It really breaks down to this:

Monk+Intuitive Attack = Viable
Fighter+Power Attack = Viable

Viable = Still gets pwn'd by wizard

tainsouvra

2007-10-09, 03:40 AM

Not quite, because when a monk has to choose between improved trip or improved disarm at level six, where as a fighter has most likely hundreds of feats to choose from if you have access to all of the "splat books" so yes, some of those feats will be more powerful than improved disarm. That doesn't mean that the monk is worse off than the fighter. "The fighter has more options, some of which are indisputably more powerful, but that doesn't make the monk worse off"
...really, listen to yourself. You're demonstrating the very weirdness I was poking at before :smallsmile:

Freelance Henchman

2007-10-09, 04:37 AM

The Monk class certainly seems to evoke strong feelings. How many Monk threads have there been here.

Karma Guard

2007-10-09, 05:22 AM

The Monk class certainly seems to evoke strong feelings. How many Monk threads have there been here.

A whole lot. I remember one from at least a year ago. I think they come and go with the seasons.

Not quite, because when a monk has to choose between improved trip or improved disarm at level six, where as a fighter has most likely hundreds of feats to choose from if you have access to all of the "splat books" so yes, some of those feats will be more powerful than improved disarm. That doesn't mean that the monk is worse off than the fighter.

Idly, I swear I've seen feats that mention that they can be taken for the Monk's 1/2/6th feat, but those are all splatty. I can't remember where, though. It doesn't really influence the discussion, though, so carry on.

trehek

2007-10-09, 07:47 AM

What significant things can the monk do that the fighter cannot?
Hit things for good damage? - No, the fighter has 2 handed power attack.
Fall down 100 feet and take no damage if adjacent to a wall? - Ring of Feather Falling or Safewing Emblem
Spell Resistance? - It doesn't matter. SR 30 is peanuts at ECL 20.
Ki Strike? - The fighter gets this earlier.
Evasion? - Ring of Evasion.
Saves? - Greater Crystal of Mind-Cloaking, Steadfast Determination for Will, Cloaks of Resistance, Good Fortitude anyway, Reflex saves can just be failed and he'll lose a few hit points.
AC? - Fighter has more. +5 Animated Extreme Shields give +8 to AC. +5 Full Plate gives +13 to AC. Throw in rings of protection +5 and amulets of natural armor +5. The fighter 20 will have about AC 41 before Dex (42 counting dex), while a Monk with a +10 Wis mod, bracers of armor +8, and a +5 shirt will have AC 43 before Dex. But the monk has spent 225k on his AC (assuming he started with Wis 24 somehow and didn't need tomes) while the fighter has spent 170k. That's 50k more to spent on...say...cloaks of resistance.
Touch AC? - Shield Ward, Deflective Armor.
Speak with Everything: Permanencied Tongues
Empty Body: Etherealness Armor Property
Perfect Self: It makes him vulnerable to planar binding. And he's not actually an Outsider, just treated for spells and effects.

Erm, that above list just strikes me as pointless.

First of all, you make a big listing about comparable AC before Dex, but that is exactly where the difference is. The monk loses in terms of armor and shield bonus, but with smart shopping the difference is very small. However, the monk gains a big difference when points are pumped into Dex and Wis, since the monk doesn't have a cap on his AC from dex like the fighter in plate does. With my experimentation, making free use of the non-epic shopping lists a monk can reach a higher AC than a fighter. Going epic it is only a matter of how much you can spend, so the point becomes irrelevant.

About the other points, you counter pretty much all of the monk abilities with magical items. Sure sure, you CAN do that. But I don't anyone ever WILL. I mean, you pretty much use up all your item slots just to make your fighter cover what a monk does and that is just plain stupid. If you do that, the monk being compared to still has all his slots free for other stuff. Of course the monk could try to spend equal item slots to improve his combat stats to something equal of the fighter then.

Seriously, it is very interesting to note that class boundaries can indeed be crossed with proper shopping, but I think that is beside the point here. It is more relevant to compare classes enhancing their own abilities which they are already good at.

Dausuul

2007-10-09, 07:53 AM

SR 30 at level 30 is effectively 50% spell failure, unless the wizard takes spell penetration. If that is peanuts, than why don't wizards wear full plate?

A wizard at that level has to be an utter moron to not do one or both of the following:

a) Pick up Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration
b) Learn assay spell resistance

Moreover, there are plenty of spells that don't allow SR (which is preposterous if you ask me; it's like giving fighters attacks that don't allow AC; but there it is).

Indon

2007-10-09, 09:57 AM

Regarding disarming:

A Monk with a Large (as in +1 size category) Sai gets a +6 to Disarm from his weapon.

Breakdown:

+4 Bonus (Sai)
+4 Bonus (2-handing of a 1-handed weapon)
-2 Penalty (Large Weapon)

If sai weren't light (Ah, the wonders of exotic weaponry...) it could give a +8. Oh, well.

Edit: Dausuul; your "A wizard would have to be a moron to not make SR completely trivial with his build choices" comment is another good example of optimization that we take for granted.

Freelance Henchman

2007-10-09, 10:08 AM

Edit: Dausuul; your "A wizard would have to be a moron to not make SR completely trivial with his build choices" comment is another good example of optimization that we take for granted.

There's something about the "Thou shalt not powerbuild" stance that bugs me because it seems to assume that the character himself will not do his best to survive. The char may not know about the dice being rolled behind the curtains, so to speak, but he must know (especially if he is a Wizard) that some creatures can resist spells and that he must counteract this; the alternative is that his own power may fail and cost him his life.

So it would be, in fact, a very good idea for the character to "optimize" himself because he would otherwise risk his life. So I think this is not necessarily a case of "pure" powerbuilding, even the character himself has a very good reason to make his spells more able to punch through resistance.

Indon

2007-10-09, 10:19 AM

There's something about the "Thou shalt not powerbuild" stance that bugs me because it seems to assume that the character himself will not do his best to survive. The char may not know about the dice being rolled behind the curtains, so to speak, but he must know (especially if he is a Wizard) that some creatures can resist spells and that he must counteract this; the alternative is that his own power may fail and cost him his life.

So it would be, in fact, a very good idea for the character to "optimize" himself because he would otherwise risk his life. So I think this is not necessarily a case of "pure" powerbuilding, even the character himself has a very good reason to make his spells more able to punch through resistance.

That's a perfectly reasonable claim for a very narrow scope of character concepts.

It eliminates, for example, wizards who may be arrogant and unwilling to believe magic can't do anything, wizards who may not study all the creatures in the Monster Manual in their spare time, book-smart wizards who aren't very good at applying practical knowledge, and the list goes on.

Seriously, not all characters are perfectly rational actors... though, most players are, since after all they have little emotional stake in any in-game events.

Morty

2007-10-09, 10:23 AM

triforcel

2007-10-09, 10:27 AM

"The fighter has more options, some of which are indisputably more powerful, but that doesn't make the monk worse off"
...really, listen to yourself. You're demonstrating the very weirdness I was poking at before

Actually, what I was trying to point out was that yes, the fighter has more feats. Because he has more feats he has more viable options to spend his feats, and the fighter will always have more feats. But the fact of the matter is that all a fighter gets throughout his twenty levels are feats, he never gets any special abilities and what not so if he wants them he'll have to buy magic items to simulate them or dip into another class. But as Armads demonstrated, trying to replicate all of a monk's special abilities will end up with you trying to wear three rings (feather fall, evasion, and protection to match AC) and numerous other magic items that take up money and item slots that.

Uh, yes it does. A Fighter can be better at disarming (and everything else) then a monk using core feats. It can be far better at disarming and everything else if you let additional material.

Better than a monk at everything? Are you sure? A twentieth level fighter will still only have 18/19 feats to his name. Core or non-core, that's not enough feats to surpass a monk in every field.

Indon

2007-10-09, 10:35 AM

Either way, I belive this thread is about monk optimization, so claim that monks aren't weak because non-optimized enemies may have problems taking them out isn't very relevant here. After all, if monk's enemies are unoptimized, why should monk be?

That's a good point, but I'm pretty sure we've resolved that the Monk isn't very powerful and have gone on to discuss causes and by extention solutions for that.

Dausuul

2007-10-09, 02:27 PM

Edit: Dausuul; your "A wizard would have to be a moron to not make SR completely trivial with his build choices" comment is another good example of optimization that we take for granted.

If you've made it to level 20, you've almost certainly spent the last 6-8 levels dealing with lots of stuff that has SR. If you didn't have some sort of counter for it already, you'd be seriously feeling the pain by 15th. By 20th, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect that most wizards would find a way to address the issue.

Indon

2007-10-09, 02:32 PM

If you've made it to level 20, you've almost certainly spent the last 6-8 levels dealing with lots of stuff that has SR. If you didn't have some sort of counter for it already, you'd be seriously feeling the pain by 15th. By 20th, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect that most wizards would find a way to address the issue.

Even if you were to take the approach that every wizard should pursue counters to every anti-magic option, you already noted that there are spells that don't offer SR. That is a ready solution that requires less flipping through sourcebooks and less feat consumption.

tainsouvra

2007-10-09, 02:40 PM

Even if you were to take the approach that every wizard should pursue counters to every anti-magic option, you already noted that there are spells that don't offer SR. That is a ready solution that requires less flipping through sourcebooks and less feat consumption. Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration are core, no flipping through sourcebooks needed :smallsmile:

Indon

2007-10-09, 02:57 PM

Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration are core, no flipping through sourcebooks needed :smallsmile:

That'd be the feat consumption.

Artemician

2007-10-10, 12:20 AM

The monk loses in terms of armor and shield bonus, but with smart shopping the difference is very small.
<snip>

About the other points, you counter pretty much all of the monk abilities with magical items. Sure sure, you CAN do that. But I don't anyone ever WILL. I mean, you pretty much use up all your item slots just to make your fighter cover what a monk does and that is just plain stupid. If you do that, the monk being compared to still has all his slots free for other stuff. Of course the monk could try to spend equal item slots to improve his combat stats to something equal of the fighter then.

Of course it's stupid. Because trying to replicate class features of another class is, most of the time, not fun and/or powerful. However, the fact that you can do this.. shows something about the monk.

But in fact, most of the items on the list are perfectly viable items for a fighter to get, and they do not chew up "slots" that could be used for anything else.

Rings of Feather Falling? Rings of Evasion? Cloaks of Resistance? Crystals of Mind Cloaking? Even if I weren't trying to emulate a monk, I would probably get these items anyway.

And if anyone tells me that not all Fighters get Magic Swords and Enchanted Full Plate I shall scream.

And as for the "you spent money thing.."

The fighter 20 will have about AC 41 before Dex (42 counting dex), while a Monk with a +10 Wis mod, bracers of armor +8, and a +5 shirt will have AC 43 before Dex. But the monk has spent 225k on his AC (assuming he started with Wis 24 somehow and didn't need tomes) while the fighter has spent 170k.

That'd be the feat consumption.

Steadfast Determination. One feat. When juxtaposed with your 10 Fighter Bonus feats, it's not such a big deal, is it?

It all boils down to this: A class that can have its role completely usurped easily is generally weak, and not fun to play. This is the case when people compare CoDzillas to Fighters.

But if a class that can have its role usurped easily can very easily usurp the role of another class.. something is very wrong here.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-10, 12:29 AM

However, the fact that you can do this.. shows something about the monk.

Use Magic Device

Artemician

2007-10-10, 12:37 AM

Use Magic Device

Use Magic Device requires scrolls and wands, items which cut out of your WBL. A lot. They're dreadfully expensive. And even so, you still do not have the versatility of the Full Caster, as you're limited by what you have on hand, as well as having substantially less spells to sling per day. Plus, you do it in an inferior fashion, as you have to make checks to succeed, whereas casters do not.

To usurp the monk's role, all you need are items which you would normally get anyway. Magic Full Plate, Rings of Feather Falling and Cloaks of Resistance are things you would spend money on, anyway. And you're not an inferior monk, you're actually superior to him, in areas that actually matter (Unarmed Strike Damage, of course, becomes redundant if you have a Magic Sword). And all with less money.

the_tick_rules

2007-10-10, 01:06 AM

monks can be lethal, it's all about build. one of their most benefical aspects is they need nearly nothing beyond their body to fight. if a wizard is seperated from his book and spell materials or a fighter from his armor and weapon, they're done for. i know when our group was captured by beastmen (a custom dm monster) my monk's ability to fight no matter what the beastmen decided to amuse themselves by giving or not giving us to fight with saved our party's butt several times.

horseboy

2007-10-10, 01:39 AM

Armads

2007-10-10, 02:12 AM

Fighter's don't actually need a ring of feather falling. A safewing emblem could do that (and it costs 250 gp). The talk of a monk being able to disarm an opponent is rather weird. A level 20 fighter can and should get a locked gauntlet, and a lot of monsters use natural weapons. The fighter has a much higher attack bonus than the monk, and can hit the monk quite easily (a non-twinked out fighter dude can get +39 to hit before stuff like Shape Soulmeld, and other miscellaneous bonuses). The fighter can match the monk's mobility with Boots of Speed and Wings of Flying. With those, he doesn't even need to get rings of feather falling anymore.

lord_khaine

2007-10-10, 04:46 AM

and if the monk gets the same things he can beat the fighters mobility again.

To usurp the monk's role, all you need are items which you would normally get anyway. Magic Full Plate, Rings of Feather Falling and Cloaks of Resistance are things you would spend money on, anyway. And you're not an inferior monk, you're actually superior to him, in areas that actually matter (Unarmed Strike Damage, of course, becomes redundant if you have a Magic Sword). And all with less money.
and the monk isnt allowed to spend gold on magic defence, his own cloak of resistance and a magic gauntlett?

Dode

2007-10-10, 04:54 AM

and the monk isnt allowed to spend gold on magic defence, his own cloak of resistance and a magic gauntlett? The Monk can buy a Ring of Feather Falling if he really wants to.

Armads

2007-10-10, 05:09 AM

and if the monk gets the same things he can beat the fighters mobility again.

Nope. Haste doesn't benefit him because he already has an enhancement bonus to speed. If he gets wings of flying, he flies faster than the fighter, but it doesn't really help much because he can't fight back if he just keeps running away.

and the monk isnt allowed to spend gold on magic defence, his own cloak of resistance and a magic gauntlett?

Even with the cloak of resistance, the monk's saves are
a. Not going to matter because the Save-or-die caster's DCs are unbeatable anyway.
b. Not going to matter because you're (and thus the fighter, since his saves are very good too) going to automatically succeed anyway. Saves aren't very important after a point.

I already calculated that the monk WILL have a higher AC than the fighter, but the fighter still can hit the monk reliably, while the monk cannot do so in reverse.

The Magic Gauntlet is already counted, since I'm assuming he has a +5 unarmed strike.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-10, 05:14 AM

(and thus the fighter, since his saves are very good too)

His Fort save, maybe. Your typical fighter may as well not even bother to roll Reflex and Will saves at high levels, as he has 0 incentive to have a dex above 13 (due to full plate), and wisdom isn't used for any of his class abilities. Oh wait! He doesn't have any class abilities! I guess he could be a stunning-fist fighter, but then why be a fighter at all- monks are better at stunning fist then fighters, and actually gain benefits from a high wisdom.

So the monk's +29/+29/+29 can't hit your fighter? The fighter is only 5 better to hit than the monk at level 20. If the monk's AC is supposedy higher, than the monk is hitting on a 10 or less, unless you are doing some crazy stuff with the monk to get AC, as I am coming up with an AC in the 39-42 range.

Armads

2007-10-10, 05:21 AM

His will save will be pretty good, against those that matter. Besides, he can just get a mind blank item. He can avoid reflex save items by tanking it away, and flying (to avoid Earthquake).

There's no real reason for a fighter to take Stunning Fist. He might as well take better things like Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, and go Dungeoncrashing, or use Shock Trooper. The monk can't, because it either doesn't have enough feats, or doesn't get the best out of it (like Power Attacking).

Basically, the fighter can do what the monk does well (with the exception of stunning fist, but it's not very effective at higher levels), but the monk cannot do what the fighter does well (dealing damage. It's not very effective at higher levels too, but it can actually kill things).

EDIT: Wait, your monk only has AC 39?
Here's how a monk can get AC 50
10 (base) + 13 armor (+8 from Bracers of armor, +5 from a magical t-shirt), +5 deflection (Ring of protection) +5 natural (amulet of natural armor) +7 dex mod + 10 wis mod (the monk i'm using has higher stats than a normal monk gets) = AC 50.
The fighter can have AC 44
10 (base) + 13 armor (+5 mithral fullplate) + 8 shield (+5 animated extreme shield) + 3 dex (max dex) + 5 deflection + 5 natural = 44

The fighter can have a +39 attack bonus
20 BAB,
+4 from Melee Weapon Mastery, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus
+10 from str mod
+5 from weapon enhancement

The monk probably has about +29 to hit.
15 BAB
+5 weapon enhancement
+1 weapon focus
+8 str mod

the fighter needs an 11 to hit the monk (and deals quite a fair bit of damage if charging and leap attacking with a falchion or making a dive attack with a lance), while the monk needs a 15 to hit the fighter (that's a 30% chance).

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-10, 05:33 AM

His will save will be pretty good, against those that matter.

Oh, so important will saves have low DCs now?
The stunning fist comment was not meant seriously, as no one expects a fighter to take it. It is however, somethings monks can excel at, and being stunned does not cease to suck at high level. There are also several feats that a monk can (and should, IMO) take that give extra options to use with your stunning fist attempts. Freezing the Lifeblood is a particularly effective feat for a monk to shoot for in my games, as I like running humanoid encounters. Unless a high-DC non-magical, non-precision-based, doesn't-have-to-deal-damage-to-work paralysis effect is too ineffective to merit your attention?

And not all Reflex saves are damage. Flying is also not a class feature fighter's get, and they get no cost break to buy it compared to a monk.

EDIT- Your monk's errors

Any monk worth the space he takes up on a character sheet takes Inuitive Attack, and thus gains his wisdom modifier to hit. I tend to combine this with carrier effect attacks, thus removing my reliance on damage to have an appreciable effect on the battle. My priority is therefore solely on wisdom. I also forgot to include dexterity into my calculations at all. :smallredface:

A magical t-shirt does not stack with bracers of armor, BTW.

Armads

2007-10-10, 05:47 AM

Freezing the Lifeblood is a particularly effective feat for a monk to shoot for in my games, as I like running humanoid encounters. Unless a high-DC non-magical, non-precision-based, doesn't-have-to-deal-damage-to-work paralysis effect is too ineffective to merit your attention?

The problem with Freezing the Lifeblood is
a. It's a fort save
b (i) Creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned
Therefore (ii) Creatures immune to stunning cannot be affected by it
(iii) Heavy Fortification grants immunity to critical hits.
c. Requires the enemy to be humanoid.
d. Doesn't do anything if the enemy makes the save.

The average fighter at level 20 can get mind blank via an item, or a greater crystal of mind shielding, which is pretty much the same thing.

The average save DC of a will save spell at level 20 is 10 + 9 spell level + 1 spell focus + 12 primary ability mod. That's DC 32.

The fighter has a +6 (base) + 8 (Steadfast Determination) + 5 resistance + 10 untyped (crystal of mind shielding) = + 29. He pretty much succeeds on his save most of the time.

The monk has a +12 (base) + 10 (wis mod) + 5 resistance + 10 untyped (crystal) = + 37. It's much better, granted, but when the DC is 32 there is no difference between + 30 and + 10000.

The fighter's fort save is +12 (base) + 8 (con mod) + 5 (resistance) = + 25. He actually has a good chance to fail his saves, but the thing is, the monk isn't any better. In fact, he is worse, since it is virtually impossible, barring imbalanced races or being a cleric or wizard or druid or artificer, to get a +10 Wis mod, +7 dex mod, +8 str mod and a +8 con mod at ECL 20. So the monk has to skimp on something, and it'll probably be strength. But still, it's very difficult to get such high stats. So the fighter'll fail, but the monk will too.

For reflex saves, the fighter has a +6 (base) + 3 (dex mod) +5 (resistance) = + 14. He's going to fail his saves, but he's got the hp to avoid dying. The monk won't die to reflex save-or-dies, but reflex saves are the least important of all.

Flying is also not a class feature fighter's get, and they get no cost break to buy it compared to a monk.

That's not much of an argument. Without flying, a monk is useless at level 20 (unless he wants to throw some shruiken and miss). So is a fighter (that isn't an archer). Thus, I'm assuming that both will get it.

The only advantage that the monk will have over the fighter is when they have no equipment. Even so, that happens so rarely (unless your DM is evil/the campaign is brutal), that it cannot be considered a factor.

EDIT: The bracers of armor DO stack. The shirt's bonus is an enhancement to armor bonus, while the bracers of armor is an armor bonus to AC. Also, Intuitive Attack is an Exalted feat. Get hit by a moral dilemma and your monk shrivels and dies. And also, intuitive attack doesn't help with damage.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-10, 05:51 AM

The fighter has a +6 (base) + 8 (Steadfast Determination) + 5 resistance + 10 untyped (crystal of mind shielding) = + 29. He pretty much succeeds on his save most of the time

There are two things in there that I am not familiar with. I am assuming PHB II garbage?

Armads

2007-10-10, 05:55 AM

The Crystal's from the Magic Item Compendium
Steadfast Determination is "PHB II Garbage", but hey, Intuitive Attack is from the Book of Exalted Cheese.

lord_khaine

2007-10-10, 06:44 AM

and thats why i have allways tried to hold this discussion within the core books, firstly so that everyone has the relevant books, and also because not everyone allows the use of the same books, if you look long enough you can find broken stuff for everyone, like the feat Chose your poison, that changes the fort save on stunning fist to a will save.

(iii) Heavy Fortification grants immunity to critical hits.

it just grants a 100% chance to ignore the addition damage on a critical hit, you isnt as such immune to them.

For reflex saves, the fighter has a +6 (base) + 3 (dex mod) +5 (resistance) = + 14. He's going to fail his saves, but he's got the hp to avoid dying. The monk won't die to reflex save-or-dies, but reflex saves are the least important of all.

edit.
besides all of this i fail to see the relevance of comparing lv 20 chars, to the best of my knowledge very few games gets past lv 15, lv 20 is pretty much the end of the line, where the power of either a monk or a fighter is insignificant next to that of a full caster.

repeat that after you have been jumped by an old dragon..

The average save DC of a will save spell at level 20 is 10 + 9 spell level + 1 spell focus + 12 primary ability mod. That's DC 32

thats assuming you face a human spellcaster, a lv 20 encounter should be able to crack the dc up quite a bit.

Armads

2007-10-10, 06:56 AM

repeat that after you have been jumped by an old dragon..

It's impossible to defeat a properly played dragon without being a full caster or casting spells off scrolls or wands or staffs (staves?) Even if you're a monk, if you get grabbed by a dragon, and dumped into a volcano by a red dragon, you're not getting out.

thats assuming you face a human spellcaster, a lv 20 encounter should be able to crack the dc up quite a bit.

How? I'm thinking of a choker wizard or a black ethergaunt, but those are overpowered monsters anyway and besides, full casters cannot be compared to melee combatants.

Manir

2007-10-10, 06:59 AM

@lord_khaine
About your comment about the EL 20 encounters, the following creatures are the only CR 20 creatures in core that force will saves (other than classed or templated creatures): Wyrm Black Dragon, Ancient Brass Dragon, Very Old Bronze Dragon, Very Old Copper Dragon, Balor, Pit Fiend, Old Red Dragon, Old Silver Dragon and the Tarrasque.

The creatures (and their highest will save DC's):
Wyrm Black Dragon (33, Frightful Presence)
Ancient Brass Dragon (29, Frightful Presence)
Very Old Bronze Dragon (31, Frightful Presence)
Very Old Copper Dragon (29, Frightful Presence)
Balor (27, Dominate Monster)
Pit Fiend (27, Mass Hold Monster, Fear Aura)
Old Red Dragon (29, Frightful Presence)
Old Silver Dragon (30, Frightful Presence)
Tarrasque (36, Frightful Presence)

Of these, only two creatures force characters to make will saves with a DC above 32, the Wyrm Black Dragon and the Tarrasque.

Dausuul

2007-10-10, 07:18 AM

Ragna

2007-10-10, 07:21 AM

You do know you just listed off every CR 20 monster in Core, right?

Yeah he knows, his point is that out of all the CR 20 creatures in core, only 2 can force a >DC32 save

Dausuul

2007-10-10, 07:25 AM

Yeah he knows, his point is that out of all the CR 20 creatures in core, only 2 can force a >DC32 save

Right, I was just commenting on the "these are the only CR 20 monsters in Core that force Will saves" bit.

Ragna

2007-10-10, 07:30 AM

Knowing him, he probably has the SRD open in front of him right now:smallsmile: .

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-10, 10:47 PM

Artemician

2007-10-10, 11:06 PM

Bracers of armor and a +5 shirt do not stack, because the bracers provide an armor bonus of 8, and the enhancement bonus on the shirt applies to the shirt, not the bracers. Which means you have bracers that grant a +8 armor bonus, and a shirt that provides a +5 armor bonus.

He's giving the monk a break. He needs it.

If we were really serious about this.. the monk would have an additional -4 to AB (nonproficiency with Gauntlets), and either significantly lower AC or HP (He gave the monk a +10 Wis mod, +7 dex mod, +8 str mod and a +8 con mod, which is improbable to say the least). And if you don't let the monk get a magic T-shirt as well....

It's not very pretty.

And even with these ticks in the monk's favour, he still loses.

*Sigh*

Armads

2007-10-10, 11:58 PM

Don't forget that the monk needs to sink a feat to get Simple Weapon Proficiency (unarmed strike) too. He isn't proficient.

A question for you: Can you build me a straight monk that can beat up a fighter of equivalent level, or usurp the fighter's primary role of dealing damage (well, trying to anyway)? If you do so via a cheesy '32d8 fist attack' build, then doesn't that say that you need to optimize much harder to beat a fighter as a monk? Which, by extension, say that a monk of about equal optimization-ness is weaker than a fighter?

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-11, 12:11 AM

He's giving the monk a break. He needs it.

No, he has the rules wrong, which can extend beyond the monk. Wizards don't need any help, and they could benefit from the same trick. That and I somehow feel obligated to point out errors.

My personal opinion on monk:

Monk as it stands absolutely sucks.
A monk with access to Intuitive Attack can be made viable with effort. He essentially becomes a rogue that deals status effects instead of sneak attack damage.

My fix for monks:

-Change Skills to 6+int
-Make flurry a standard action. You only gain your flurry attacks this way, not your regular iteratives.
-Give the monk an intuitive attack ability at 2nd or 3rd level that applies only to special monk weapons.
-Give the monk a chi pool similar to the ninja class, from which abundant step, quivering palm, and wholeness of body function (each uses 1).
-Add an Airwalk ability, which works like the travel domain power, except with the airwalk spell instead of the freedom of movement spell.
-Allow 'magic cloth wraps' or similar for monks to use as magic weapons.

SpikeFightwicky

2007-10-11, 11:55 AM

Don't forget that the monk needs to sink a feat to get Simple Weapon Proficiency (unarmed strike) too. He isn't proficient.

Also keep in mind that the monk can't flurry with a Gauntlet, as it's not a monk weapon.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-11, 09:02 PM

Also keep in mind that the monk can't flurry with a Gauntlet, as it's not a monk weapon.

Read the rules lately? A gauntlet is an unarmed strike, and unarmed strikes are special monk weapons? Why is this even a point of contention- It is an obvious fact.

Armads

2007-10-12, 12:47 AM

Gauntlet: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets.

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

It's not a special monk weapon. It's not an unarmed strike. It's a gauntlet. It makes unarmed attacks (attacks that provoke AoOs).

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-12, 02:04 AM

Gauntlet: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets.

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

Emphasis mine, 'nuff said. Thanks for providing the necessary quotes. Saved me the time of copying them m'self.

Armads

2007-10-12, 04:46 AM

The 'otherwise' aspect refers to the gauntlet attack. The gauntlet attack is an attack that deals lethal unarmed strike damage. It's not an unarmed strike. It's a gauntlet attack. You're not attacking with unarmed strikes, you're attacking with a gauntlet. You can't make unarmed attacks with bare fists when you're wearing gauntlets, can you?

Weird, the quotes you use can help explain my argument too.

Armads

2007-10-12, 04:50 AM

I found the relevant question in the 3.5 FAQ released by WotC:

Q: Can a monk wear a gauntlet and still use her flurry of
blows? Does she gain any other special abilities of the
gauntlets with her unarmed strikes?

A: Technically, a gauntlet isn’t an unarmed strike (it has a
separate line on Table 7–5: Weapons in the Player’s
Handbook), and thus can’t be used as part of a flurry of blows.
A monk could wear gauntlets and still use flurry of blows, she
just couldn’t attack with the gauntlets as part of the flurry
(she’d be using her feet, elbows, knees, and so forth instead).
If that’s too much hairsplitting for you, treat a gauntlet
attack as effectively identical to an unarmed strike, except that
it always deals lethal damage (even when worn by a monk).
Many magic items called gauntlets aren’t necessarily using
the same terminology. Gauntlets of ogre power, for example,
aren’t always metal gloves. It’s conceivable that a monk might
be wearing magic gauntlets that grant a special benefit on her
unarmed strikes without those gauntlets also serving as
weapons in their own right. In this case, the monk is making
unarmed strike attacks, not gauntlet attacks.

EDIT: So it depends on houseruling.

EDIT again: You're right. Right underneath that question is another question:

Q: Can a monk treat an attack with a gauntlet as an
unarmed strike?

A: A monk could wear such an item and treat it as an unarmed
strike (since the Player’s Handbook says that “a strike with a
gauntlet is . . . considered an unarmed attack”), although the
damage dealt by the gauntlet would always be considered lethal
damage (as noted in the gauntlet entry) and the monk would
suffer a nonproficiency penalty (since the gauntlet is a simple
weapon). The monk could even use gauntlet attacks as part of a
flurry of blows.

The sage must have not been in a proper state of mind when he wrote this :P

lord_khaine

2007-10-12, 06:01 AM

well i doubt any would disagree about that the monk needs the gauntlett.

A question for you: Can you build me a straight monk that can beat up a fighter of equivalent level, or usurp the fighter's primary role of dealing damage (well, trying to anyway)? If you do so via a cheesy '32d8 fist attack' build, then doesn't that say that you need to optimize much harder to beat a fighter as a monk? Which, by extension, say that a monk of about equal optimization-ness is weaker than a fighter

though i dont belive it is really relevant, since imo the power of a class comes from how much it can contribute during a adventure, then yes i belive i can build a monk who can beat up a fighter of equal level.
at low to mid level it might also be able to hold up to the figher in terms of damage output, though in the end i suspect the advantage of 2handet power attack would win out.

and why on earth is it "cheesy" to crank up the damage of a unarmed attack, but not to PA things to oblivion.

My personal opinion on monk:

Monk as it stands absolutely sucks.
A monk with access to Intuitive Attack can be made viable with effort. He essentially becomes a rogue that deals status effects instead of sneak attack damage.

heh, thats just about the opposite of what i belive, since imo a monk who doesnt focus on str lose the advantage of trips and grapples :smallsmile:

Armads

2007-10-12, 06:58 AM

though i dont belive it is really relevant, since imo the power of a class comes from how much it can contribute during a adventure, then yes i belive i can build a monk who can beat up a fighter of equal level.

I suppose the monk wins by having things to do outside of combat while the fighter just sits around and does nothing, right?

and why on earth is it "cheesy" to crank up the damage of a unarmed attack, but not to PA things to oblivion.

I never said that PA-ing things to oblivion was cheesy, did I? You just need a much higher level of optimization to get huge amounts of unarmed strike damage than to get huge amounts of power attack. A normal fighter cannot properly PA things to oblivion anyway, that's the Complete Champion frenzied berserker barbarian's job. It is, however, much harder to crank up the unarmed strike damage than to add lots of power attack damage to an attack (you only need leap attack, shock trooper and frenzied berserker to add lots of power attack damage, and pounce can be acquired via frenzied berserker), while to crank up a monk's damage, you need lots of size increases, initiate of draconic mysteries, battle fist, fist of the forest, all of which require lots of gold or many feats spent to qualify for the PrCs, plus Improved Natural Attack and stuff like that).

Another problem with the monk is that if it uses Stunning Fist, it will require significant amounts of feats or gold to actually make using it worthwhile (like Ability focus, ki straps), and doesn't work against many creatures.

SpikeFightwicky

2007-10-12, 07:35 AM

Read the rules lately? A gauntlet is an unarmed strike, and unarmed strikes are special monk weapons? Why is this even a point of contention- It is an obvious fact.

Did you read Armads comment and quotes? The FAQ states that it can't be used in a flurry, and then contradicts itself and says it can. That's why it's a point of contention. Or apparently we can assume we're automatically right and everyone else is wrong.

Kesnit

2007-10-12, 07:42 AM

Another problem with the monk is that if it uses Stunning Fist, it will require significant amounts of feats or gold to actually make using it worthwhile (like Ability focus, ki straps), and doesn't work against many creatures.

A Rogue's Sneak Attack doesn't work against a lot of creatures. Are you also saying that SA is weak?

SpikeFightwicky

2007-10-12, 07:51 AM

A Rogue's Sneak Attack doesn't work against a lot of creatures. Are you also saying that SA is weak?

It is if your DM planned an undead/construct game with few traps and you have to play the rogue :smalleek: Problem was that I wasn't much of a talker either, concentrating on sneaking/thieving more than bluff/diplomacy. That was one LONG campaign.

Armads

2007-10-12, 08:00 AM

triforcel

2007-10-12, 01:29 PM

Yeah, shame that only undead and constructs are immune to crits. Well, undead, constructs, and plants. Oh, and oozes. And swarms. Don't forget Elementals. So yeah, there're just undead, constructs, plants, oozes, swarms, and elementals that are naturally immune to critical hits. But beyond that there's still anything dressed in armor with heavy fortification, and numerous class abilities and probably even spells that grant that immunity.

Also, I'm not sure where Penetrating Strike is from, but I'm not sure it would stack with a Truedeath Crystal.

Kaelik

2007-10-12, 03:05 PM

Probably even spells that grant that immunity.

Definitely spells. Lots of different ones.

Armads

2007-10-12, 07:25 PM

Arakune

2007-10-12, 07:44 PM

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-12, 08:33 PM

Did you read Armads comment and quotes? The FAQ states that it can't be used in a flurry, and then contradicts itself and says it can. That's why it's a point of contention. Or apparently we can assume we're automatically right and everyone else is wrong.

Yes, I did. FAQ =/= errata, and has often been wrong in the past. However, there is no need for a FAQ, as gauntlets are specifically stated in the PHB to be unarmed strikes.

And for the coup d'grace:

Behold, the weapon table:

Unarmed Attacks
Gauntlet 2 gp 1d2 1d3 ×2 — 1 lb. Bludgeoning
Unarmed strike — 1d23 1d33 ×2 — — Bludgeoning

Armads

2007-10-12, 08:36 PM

What is the most powerfull monk (and monk only PrC) and the most powerful fighter (only completly martial PrC without any absurd Ex abilities and none Su and Sp a abilities)?

Can we compare then?

And so, you mean

"What is the most powerful monk only PrC versus the most powerful full BAB PrC without any powerful Ex abilities and no Su and Sp abilities?"

Obviously, the monk PrC wins, because you are comparing the best PrC a class has to a completely crippled PrC.

Also, no magical equipment uber-cheese

Right. So now +5 mountain plate, a +5 animated extreme shield, a greater crystal of mind shielding, as well as a tome of strength +5 and a belt of strength +6, a ring of protection +5, and an amulet of natural armor +5, wings of flying and boots of speed is 'magical equipment uber-cheese'? That's a pretty surprising opinion, considering the monk needs more equipment.

EDIT: You still have a proficiency penalty if you use a gauntlet (or an unarmed strike, although I think that should've been errata'ed). And it's better to use a necklace of natural attacks anyway.

Kesnit

2007-10-12, 08:39 PM

@Kesnit: Penetrating strike lets you deal 1/2 your sneak attack damage to creatures normally immune to sneak attack at the cost of your trap sense. Then get the greater truedeath crystal from the MIC and you deal 1.5x sneak attack damage to undead =P. I believe there's also an ability to deal 1/2 sneak attack damage to undead in expedition to castle ravenloft or some other adventure. If so, you can deal 2x damage to undead. Now you're one of the better undead killers =P

But those are feats and items you have to buy, which goes along with the point I was trying to make. (Sorry if I didn't make it clear. I knew what I was thinking!! :smallbiggrin:)

Armads said Stunning Fist is bad because it takes a lot of feats and items to make it useful, and they are monsters immune to Stunning Fist. I only pointed out that there are monster immune to SA, so does Armads think Rogues are gimped because SA can't be used all the time?

Armads

2007-10-12, 08:46 PM

Penetrating strike IS NOT A FEAT! It's an alternate class feature, that lets rogues sneak attack stuff that is normally immune to critical hits. A rogue who takes it loses trap sense, which is a joke of an ability anyway.

The greater truedeath crystal is 10, 000 gp. That's 1/72 of WBL at ECL 20. Would a sneak attacking rogue not take it if it had the chance to?

All classes that rely on melee attacks are gimped at higher levels anyway, unless they have spellcasting or have other roles, like buffing (hello Gaseous Form).

wowy319

2007-10-12, 09:06 PM

IMHO, monks look broken, but consider the following: The main source of their damage (unarmed strikes) can only be given enhancements through a permanency spell combined w/ (greater) magic fang (which costs precious XP), a monk's belt (expensive) or an amulet of mighty fists (at the lowest level, it has a base cost three times that of a +1 enhancement for a weapon).

Also, if they don't have a great DEX or WIS modifier, their AC takes a huge hit.

Now, as for benefits: slow fall ROCKS. The bonus feats, great saving throw progression and astronomical unarmed damage and numerous class features make for a great secondary character. Believe me, a monk is balanced by both good and bad.

Armads

2007-10-12, 09:15 PM

Now, as for benefits: slow fall ROCKS. The bonus feats, great saving throw progression and astronomical unarmed damage and numerous class features make for a great secondary character. Believe me, a monk is balanced by both good and bad.

Are you serious? Slow fall can be replaced by a safewing emblem or feather fall. Fighters have more bonus feats. Good saves are obselete once you reach a certain point. Astronomical Unarmed Damage is only astronomical if you aren't a monk 20, and power attack beats a normal monk's unarmed damage.

Kesnit

2007-10-12, 09:26 PM

Are you serious? Slow fall can be replaced by a safewing emblem or feather fall.

Which you have to buy, rather than buy something that might increase your saving throws or combat abilities.

Good saves are obselete once you reach a certain point.

Tell that to the fighter who is standing there whistling Dixie because he failed his Will save while the Monk keeps punching.

triforcel

2007-10-12, 09:30 PM

Penetrating Strike. Works on everything. Truedeath crystals let you sneak attack undead. Penetrating Strike lets you sneak attack anything 'normally immune to sneak attack'.

Penetrating Strike's from Dungeonscape.

Well that doesn't sound like it would stack at all, but I don't have Dungeonscape so I can't look up the exact wording of it.

And so, you mean

"What is the most powerful monk only PrC versus the most powerful full BAB PrC without any powerful Ex abilities and no Su and Sp abilities?"

Obviously, the monk PrC wins, because you are comparing the best PrC a class has to a completely crippled PrC.

I believe he said without any absurd Ex abilities. I don't have the time nor the inclination to read up on every single prestige class, but I'm rather certain that some of them are just ridiculous in what they can do.

Right. So now +5 mountain plate, a +5 animated extreme shield, a greater crystal of mind shielding, as well as a tome of strength +5 and a belt of strength +6, a ring of protection +5, and an amulet of natural armor +5, wings of flying and boots of speed is 'magical equipment uber-cheese'? That's a pretty surprising opinion, considering the monk needs more equipment.

Well, aside from mountain plate not being that great of a choice (even if you do get proficiency with it for free), all of that is still quite expensive and you're not going to get it until the highest of levels which unless a campaign starts there it's not likely to get there. Plus I've never seen any reason that a monk would need more equipment than any other combat oriented class.

Armads

2007-10-12, 09:30 PM

Which you have to buy, rather than buy something that might increase your saving throws or combat abilities.

HAHAHA!!! Sorry. The safewing emblem costs 250 gp. Can you buy an item that 'might increase your saving throws or combat abilities' for 250 gp that is actually worth something at say, ECL 20?

Tell that to the fighter who is standing there whistling Dixie because he failed his Will save while the Monk keeps punching.

Mind Blank, Greater Crystal of Mind Shielding, Cloak of Resistance, whatever. If the DC is so high that the fighter cannot make the save, chances are, the Monk cannot too.

EDIT:

Well, aside from mountain plate not being that great of a choice (even if you do get proficiency with it for free), all of that is still quite expensive and you're not going to get it until the highest of levels which unless a campaign starts there it's not likely to get there. Plus I've never seen any reason that a monk would need more equipment than any other combat oriented class.

Full Plate could work too, the fighter needs to get gloves of dex +2 to use them optimally, though. Monks need more stat boosters than most other combat oriented class (except for the Paladin). They also need to spend more to get an equivalent armor bonus (Bracers of Armor +8 cost 64k, while +5 full plate costs 26k and gives 5 more AC), their enhancements cost more (the cheapest, the necklace of natural attacks, costs 50k to get +5 fists and is 3.0), and the core Amulet of Might Fists costs way too much to be ever useful.

I believe he said without any absurd Ex abilities. I don't have the time nor the inclination to read up on every single prestige class, but I'm rather certain that some of them are just ridiculous in what they can do.

Yes, that is true, but there are some absurd monk PrCs too, like the Fist of the Forest and the Initiate of Draconic Mysteries.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-12, 09:31 PM

astronomical unarmed damage

It would be great if the monk actually got that. Actually, I have some issues with the idea of a fist being more destructive than a greatsword blow, but it would still be great if a monk actually achieved good damage potential.

Armads

2007-10-12, 09:35 PM

It would be great if the monk actually got that. Actually, I have some issues with the idea of a fist being more destructive than a greatsword blow, but it would still be great if a monk actually achieved good damage potential.

He can, but not via being a monk. It involves Initiate of Draconic Mysteries, Fist of the Forest, massive size increases, and other stuff. Some examples are shown here (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=332596), here (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-316793).

It's quite funny that in the first link, there are usually 2 monk levels, and the more powerful one doesn't use monk levels at all =P

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-12, 09:57 PM

He can, but not via being a monk.

True, but I was referring to the monk class itself. Which I am sure you already knew.:yuk:

trebonius

2007-10-13, 01:33 PM

The following probably reprises remarks gone on before but here is my take on monks (my main character BTW is a monk and I really enjoy the class:smallsmile: ): -

It should be noted the above relates to core rules only. We do not use any of the splat books etc.

Monks are underpowered but

1. If you roll up your character and have a large number of decent stats then monks are a decent option (paladin would be more effective) for a fun character. I would not go with a monk if you are using a points buy approach.

2. Monks can get a pretty good AC. Bracers/mage armour, ring of spell storing (for shield) and 5 ranks tumble for fighting defensively (if you need to go for an AC) makes for a good start. You make a good buffing target - owls wisdom, cats grace (plus of course bull's strength) or even better the equivalent stat boost items are great. Magic vestment is another good one as well. All in all, my character has the best AC in the party. What is more I tend to have the best touch AC as well. Lets add in dodge as well which is on the feat path for spring attack and mobility which is sometimes

3. Obviously, having good saves is good news as well - together with spell resistance at higher levels, even if some care is needed when you want your friendly cleric to heal you.

4. Defence is not everything - you need to hand out some damage as well. I have already mentioned bulls strength but another good one is greater magic weapon. Flurry of blows gives you a decent number of attacks.

5. Party role is important. You do not want other characters thinking why have we brought this monk along - even a bard would be better! My role is as a scout. High AC, good saves (and evasion) and fast movement (to get out of trouble) plus class skills relevant to scouting (spot listen hide etc) make the monk to my mind the best best character for point duty (barbarian might be better because of high hitpoints).
In combat, you act as a bit of a wall for others to hind behind to do their stuff. Stunning and disarm are useful options as well. The ability to get places (even if only to grant flanking bonuses) is often much appreciated by other characters. Finally, some monsters unsportingly try to run away and deprive the party of thier rightful earned experience. Monks are useful pursuers (so long as they are sensible!)

So with all the above, you might feel that I believe monks are overpowered and awesome:smallcool: . Sadly I do not:smallsigh:

1. Their damage output. Appropriate magic weapons are difficult to find (though creating some enchanted gloves would cost the same as a magic weapon). Their BAB is not brilliant and unlike clerics they do not have access to divine power etc. At low levels, their flurry of blows has penalties to hit. Fighter types often specialise in strength (and a monks stat bonuses are likely to be scattered over a number of requisites) so hitting will be more difficult. With high bonuses to hit, fighters can power attack effectively alonging them to overcome damage resistance. Monks are pressed for feats and may not take power attack or if they do be unable to use it effectively.

It has been a frequent experience of my monk that opponents have attacked me, missed and then found my attack on them to be so ineffectual that they wandered off to attack a more threatening party member.

2. Buffing is pretty important to you but this requires other PC's to cooperate with you. They are often reluctant (especially if they perceive you to be ineffectual in combat). You, the PC, need good diplomacy skills. Offering to take point in exchange for buffing is a good ploy.

3. Spell casters can often replicate your abilities. Fast movement is an obvious example. Expeditious retreat is good, fly is even better.

All in all, I find a monk is underpowered in combat compared to other classes.

I would want any fix to be carefully thought about though. A monk must not be as good as a fighter in handing out damage.

Of course all the above is probably irrelevant as we find everything is changed in 4th edition (with monks deleted as a class???)

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-13, 08:22 PM

A minor advantage for the monk is that he can remain hidden whenever there is available cover or concealment while still keeping up with the party, due to his increased movement rate. This is only a minor advantage because he lacks sneak attack, but a rogue/monk can keep to the shadows and still keep up with the party, while having the sneak attack to make good on his stealth, and the wisdom to spot ambushes and have a good DC stunning fist.

I believe there is also a rogue/monk feat that gives you better stunning fist DC when your opponent is flat-footed, as well.

However, a class should be good enough to take 20 levels in. Good enough to make PrCing and multi-classing decisions, not foregone conclusions.

triforcel

2007-10-14, 03:54 PM

The feat you mention is in Complete Adventurer. Aescetic Rogue, lets you freely multiclass between monk and rogue, adds the two classes together to determine unarmed strike damage, and adds 2 to the DC of stunning fist when delivered with a sneak attack. There are also feats to help with monk/paladin, monk/ranger, and monk/arcane caster.

I still maintain that monk is good enough to take twenty levels in, and supplement that with a question of how often do you see anyone on these boards mention taking all twenty levels in a base class. Pretty much all I have seen is saying that if you want to make a good fighter you need to take class x or y and barbarians need to dip into class q and of course casters need to take a combination of classes g, z, and u. I'm over dramatizing a bit, but I've never actually seen someone take twenty levels in a class without it being a gestalt campaign.

Armads

2007-10-14, 09:39 PM

Wizard 20 is good. Cleric 20 is good. Fighter 20 can be made good (well, good for melee classes). Druid 20 is probably the most optimized of the "X 20s". Warblade and Swordsage 20 are pretty good.

Artemician

2007-10-14, 09:50 PM

Wizard 20 is good. Cleric 20 is good. Fighter 20 can be made good (well, good for melee classes). Druid 20 is probably the most optimized of the "X 20s". Warblade and Swordsage 20 are pretty good.

You missed out Barbarian 20, Bard 20, Dragonfire Adept 20, Incarnate 20, Totemist 20, Duskblade 20, Beguiler 20, Dread Necromancer 20.. etc etc. In fact, most classes can be taken to 20 with no problem, those that can't (Paladin, Samurai, Swashbuckler, etc) have problems.

[I would not put Fighter as a level 20-takeable class, personally.]

Kurald Galain

2007-10-15, 05:38 AM

I'm over dramatizing a bit, but I've never actually seen someone take twenty levels in a class without it being a gestalt campaign.

That's because most campaigns do not ever reach level twenty. Level ten would be much fairer for class comparisons.

It's interesting how this debate has turned into "facts vs. opinion". One side keeps asserting that they "have seen a monk that was great", whereas the other keeps proving by the rules that "in general, they suck". It's funny that this isn't even a contradiction.

Aquillion

2007-10-15, 06:02 AM

Yes, I did. FAQ =/= errata, and has often been wrong in the past. However, there is no need for a FAQ, as gauntlets are specifically stated in the PHB to be unarmed strikes.The point is moot, as the PHP doesn't just say that gauntlets can be used for unarmed strikes. It says:

This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.In other words, that is the only effect a gauntlet can have--it lets you deal lethal damage, and is otherwise considered to be your normal unarmed attack, using all the stats and rules for your normal gauntletless unarmed attack. Per RAW, that's it. It doesn't let you use special materials, it doesn't let you add any sort of enchantment, etc, etc... if you hit something that has a nasty effect to people who hit it unarmed, your gauntlet is still considered an 'unarmed attack', so you still suffer the effect. If you get a silver gauntlet, your attacks still don't pierce DR/silver, since they're considered to be unarmed for all purposes except doing lethal damage. You can't get a magic gauntlet to add to your attack, since your attacks are considered to be unarmed for all purposes except deciding whether you do unarmed damage or not.

And, of course, monks can do that anyway. Hence, a gauntlet, for a monk, is nothing but a waste of 2 gp.

This also explains the confusion here; the truth is that monks can use gauntlets if they really want to, but can derive no benefit from doing so (and therefore have no reason to do so.)

SpikeFightwicky

2007-10-15, 09:07 AM

Now, as for benefits: slow fall ROCKS. The bonus feats, great saving throw progression and astronomical unarmed damage and numerous class features make for a great secondary character. Believe me, a monk is balanced by both good and bad.

Well, slow fall isn't exactly the bee's knees. If the monk isn't next to a wall, he's going splat like everyone else (the dragon snatches you up and drops you from 200 feet up -> are there any walls nearby? -> No... you're fighting on a mountainside -> *Splat*).

Astronomical unarmed damage isn't too stellar either. 2d10 does an average of 11 damage per hit, and there won't be a huge increase from strength. At level 1, a half-orc barb with a great sword can easily do 2d6+6 damage (13 average damage...), and crits twice as often. And with the expenditure of a feat, the monk can up it to 4d8 (18 dmg avg - and at level 6 minimum, but he won't reach 4d8 dmg until lvl 20, or 16 with a monk's belt, which takes up his 'belt' slot).

triforcel

2007-10-15, 04:25 PM

Well, slow fall isn't exactly the bee's knees. If the monk isn't next to a wall, he's going splat like everyone else (the dragon snatches you up and drops you from 200 feet up -> are there any walls nearby? -> No... you're fighting on a mountainside -> *Splat*).

Astronomical unarmed damage isn't too stellar either. 2d10 does an average of 11 damage per hit, and there won't be a huge increase from strength. At level 1, a half-orc barb with a great sword can easily do 2d6+6 damage (13 average damage...), and crits twice as often. And with the expenditure of a feat, the monk can up it to 4d8 (18 dmg avg - and at level 6 minimum, but he won't reach 4d8 dmg until lvl 20, or 16 with a monk's belt, which takes up his 'belt' slot).

Yes, slow fall doesn't always work, but it's still a pretty good ability. Especially if your campaign is focusing on dungeon crawling and you know that there will usually be a wall nearby.

As for damage, 2d10 is more than any weapon that I've seen for a medium sized creature. On top of that base damage a monk can match the strength score, damage increasing feats, and magical enhancements that any generic melee class can produce.

Yes, a fighter will always have more feats and probably a few more points of damage through weapon specialization. And yes, the barbarian can rage to increase his strength further than a monk could reasonably aim for. But those things really go without saying as that's what the purpose of those two classes are.

You can scream MAD all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the monk has the choice of where to put it's stats, and if he wants to focus on pure damage output he can keep up with any of the melee classes out there.

Kurald Galain

2007-10-15, 05:06 PM

As for damage, 2d10 is more than any weapon that I've seen for a medium sized creature. On top of that base damage a monk can match the strength score, damage increasing feats, and magical enhancements that any generic melee class can produce.
Except that he can't. For starters, Power Attack doesn't work well with unarmed strikes. Furthermore, nearly every weapon has better criticals. Et cetera.

You can scream MAD all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the monk has the choice of where to put it's stats, and if he wants to focus on pure damage output he can keep up with any of the melee classes out there.
It's funny you haven't seen the actual evidence yet, because it has been posted many, many times in this and other threads. Every other melee class outdamages the monk, easily, and by far.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-15, 05:44 PM

In other words, that is the only effect a gauntlet can have--it lets you deal lethal damage, and is otherwise considered to be your normal unarmed attack, using all the stats and rules for your normal gauntletless unarmed attack. Per RAW, that's it. It doesn't let you use special materials, it doesn't let you add any sort of enchantment, etc, etc... if you hit something that has a nasty effect to people who hit it unarmed, your gauntlet is still considered an 'unarmed attack', so you still suffer the effect. If you get a silver gauntlet, your attacks still don't pierce DR/silver, since they're considered to be unarmed for all purposes except doing lethal damage. You can't get a magic gauntlet to add to your attack, since your attacks are considered to be unarmed for all purposes except deciding whether you do unarmed damage or not.

Now you're just being silly. By RAW, you can still take actions when dead- level silly. Gauntlets are weapons. They count as unarmed strikes. Weapons can be enchanted. Therefore, gauntlets can be enchanted to augment your unarmed strikes. This is only confusing if you try to make it confusing.

I bolded the part you got right. *golf clap*

Sucrose

2007-10-15, 06:56 PM

You can scream MAD all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the monk has the choice of where to put it's stats, and if he wants to focus on pure damage output he can keep up with any of the melee classes out there.

This is only true when rolling stats. While that is the supposed default, quite a few people play in point-buy systems, where you must, by definition, pay for good scores somewhere with poor scores elsewhere. The monk, which needs at THE VERY LEAST half decent scores in many attributes, therefore cannot pour quite a few points into strength, as a fighter or barbarian can.

Armads

2007-10-15, 06:57 PM

As for damage, 2d10 is more than any weapon that I've seen for a medium sized creature. On top of that base damage a monk can match the strength score, damage increasing feats, and magical enhancements that any generic melee class can produce.

Sadly, the best unarmed damage builds have 0 or 2 monk levels. You cannot match the damage boosting feats, or the strength score. You can match the magical enhancements, but it's more expensive than a generic melee class can get.

Now you're just being silly. By RAW, you can still take actions when dead- level silly. Gauntlets are weapons. They count as unarmed strikes. Weapons can be enchanted. Therefore, gauntlets can be enchanted to augment your unarmed strikes. This is only confusing if you try to make it confusing.

Yes, but you suffer a nonproficiency penalty.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-15, 08:26 PM

Yes, but you suffer a nonproficiency penalty.

Neither are you proficient with unarmed strikes. Any sane DM will overrule that though.

triforcel

2007-10-15, 08:42 PM

Except that he can't. For starters, Power Attack doesn't work well with unarmed strikes. Furthermore, nearly every weapon has better criticals. Et cetera.

Power attack works just fine with unarmed strikes.

Power Attack [General]
Prerequisite

Str 13.
Benefit

On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.
Special

If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls. You can’t add the bonus from Power Attack to the damage dealt with a light weapon (except with unarmed strikes or natural weapon attacks), even though the penalty on attack rolls still applies. (Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon.)

A fighter may select Power Attack as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Furthermore, the unarmed strike has the same critical parameters as about half the weapons in the players handbook, and if it's that much of a concern for you there are feats and enchantments to improve the crit range and multiplier.

This is only true when rolling stats. While that is the supposed default, quite a few people play in point-buy systems, where you must, by definition, pay for good scores somewhere with poor scores elsewhere. The monk, which needs at THE VERY LEAST half decent scores in many attributes, therefore cannot pour quite a few points into strength, as a fighter or barbarian can.

Not true, the monk benefits from having good scores in multiple attributes, but can distribute his scores however he wishes. If you are making a monk concerned solely with dealing damage you can put just as many points into strength as a fighter or barbarian can.

Sadly, the best unarmed damage builds have 0 or 2 monk levels. You cannot match the damage boosting feats, or the strength score. You can match the magical enhancements, but it's more expensive than a generic melee class can get.

1) You can match the strength score if you choose to.
2) You can take just as many feats as any other class other than fighter.
3) There's no reason that a monk should be charged more for magical enhancements than any other class.

MeklorIlavator

2007-10-15, 08:49 PM

He said power attack doesn't work well with unarmed strike, and it doesn't. Unarmed strikes can't be used two-handed, so its a 1-for-1 trade, which is inferior to the 2-1 trade most melee combatants have available.

Reel On, Love

2007-10-15, 08:51 PM

Power attack works just fine with unarmed strikes.
At a 1:1 ratio. For greatswords it's a 2:1 ratio.

Furthermore, the unarmed strike has the same critical parameters as about half the weapons in the players handbook, and if it's that much of a concern for you there are feats and enchantments to improve the crit range and multiplier.
Yeah, except that the GOOD melee weapons have better criticals (19 or 18-20 x2, or 20 x3) any feat and enchantment you take the guy with the weapon can, too.

Not true, the monk benefits from having good scores in multiple attributes, but can distribute his scores however he wishes. If you are making a monk concerned solely with dealing damage you can put just as many points into strength as a fighter or barbarian can.
This ignores the fact that you can't AFFORD to do so. Because you'll DIE, since your AC will be taking a vacation to the bahamas. And, god, just picture a first-level monk with 18 STR (and, like, 12 DEX and WIS). 12 AC. Like 8 or 9 HP (can't afford CON, either). That guy is dead like punk.

1) You can match the strength score if you choose to.
2) You can take just as many feats as any other class other than fighter.
3) There's no reason that a monk should be charged more for magical enhancements than any other class.
1) You can, but doing so makes you almost unplayable.
2) "Damage boosting feats" includes Power Attack, which you don't get as much use out of as a guy with a two-handed weapon and a higher BAB to Power Attack away, and a higher AB ignoring the BAB difference, too.
3) There's no reason, but that's how the game is designed.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-15, 09:25 PM

Comparison: Level 11 sword/board fighter, lvl 11 monk, assuming no magical enhancement.

Fighter- Str 15(17), Con 14, Dex 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8
Monk- Str 15(17), Wis 14, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 10, Cha 8

ACs:
Monk 15(f 14/t15), Fighter 21 (f 20/t11)

HP:
Monk 64
Fighter 86

Opponent
Level 10 warrior, all Str 12, all others 10, full plate and greatsword, 55HP

Monk's attacks are +11/+11/+11/+6 (1d10+3)
Fighter's attacks are (with power attack of 3), +13/+8/+3 (1d10+8)

Target has an AC of 18, and an attack bonus of +7/+2 for 2d6+1

The monk hits the warrior for ~20dmg/rnd, on average.
The monk stuns his target with his first attack 33% of the time, taking into account the chance of missing and wasting the attack.
He gets hit for ~8dmg/rnd, on average

The monk defeats his target in 3 rnds, and takes 16(the warrior loses one turn on average in those 3 rnds) dmg in the process.
The monk can take 8 warriors before going down.

The fighter hits the warrior for ~20dmg/rnd, on average.
The warrior deals ~3 dmg/rnd, on average.

The fighter defeats the warrior in 3rnds, and takes 9 dmg in the process.
The fighter can take 9 or 10 warriors before going down.

The fighter pulls out ahead w/o magic gear, and that while using a sword/board, instead of the superior 2HF w/power attack. I doubt I was using the optimum PA amount either, but I PA's sufficient to put Base Attack Bonus equal.

Reel On, Love

2007-10-15, 09:28 PM

Why would a fighter be sword-and-board when you can afford an Animated Shield if you want one? Sword and board is weak.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-15, 09:37 PM

Why would a fighter be sword-and-board when you can afford an Animated Shield if you want one? Sword and board is weak.

I answer you thusly:

Comparison: Level 11 sword/board fighter, lvl 11 monk, assuming no magical enhancement.

The fighter pulls out ahead w/o magic gear, and that while using a sword/board, instead of the superior 2HF w/power attack.

Reel On, Love

2007-10-15, 09:58 PM

...why would you assume no magical enhancement? That's unrelated to anything ever.

triforcel

2007-10-15, 10:00 PM

Quick question. What is the fighter's equipment?

Armads

2007-10-15, 10:09 PM

I think it's a bastard sword and a heavy shield. None of his loot is magical.

I think his feats were Power Attack, EWP (bastard sword), WF (Bastard Sword), GWF (bastard sword), WS (bastard sword).

triforcel

2007-10-15, 10:24 PM

Thanks, Armads, but I need Skjald to tell me since it's his calculations. So to clarify my request, what are all three character's feats? and what is the equipment of the fighter? Additionally, if you have a feat or item from outside the PHB, could you mention what book it is in so I don't have to look through thirty some odd books to find it? :smalltongue: Thanks.

Just to be safe.

Comparison: Level 11 sword/board fighter, lvl 11 monk, assuming no magical enhancement.

Fighter- Str 15(17), Con 14, Dex 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8
Monk- Str 15(17), Wis 14, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 10, Cha 8

ACs:
Monk 15(f 14/t15), Fighter 21 (f 20/t11)

HP:
Monk 64
Fighter 86

Opponent
Level 10 warrior, all Str 12, all others 10, full plate and greatsword, 55HP

Monk's attacks are +11/+11/+11/+6 (1d10+3)
Fighter's attacks are (with power attack of 3), +13/+8/+3 (1d10+8)

Target has an AC of 18, and an attack bonus of +7/+2 for 2d6+1

The monk hits the warrior for ~20dmg/rnd, on average.
The monk stuns his target with his first attack 33% of the time, taking into account the chance of missing and wasting the attack.
He gets hit for ~8dmg/rnd, on average

The monk defeats his target in 3 rnds, and takes 16(the warrior loses one turn on average in those 3 rnds) dmg in the process.
The monk can take 8 warriors before going down.

The fighter hits the warrior for ~20dmg/rnd, on average.
The warrior deals ~3 dmg/rnd, on average.

The fighter defeats the warrior in 3rnds, and takes 9 dmg in the process.
The fighter can take 9 or 10 warriors before going down.

The fighter pulls out ahead w/o magic gear, and that while using a sword/board, instead of the superior 2HF w/power attack. I doubt I was using the optimum PA amount either, but I PA's sufficient to put Base Attack Bonus equal.

Dode

2007-10-15, 11:04 PM

I think it's a bastard sword and a heavy shield. None of his loot is magical.

I think his feats were Power Attack, EWP (bastard sword), WF (Bastard Sword), GWF (bastard sword), WS (bastard sword). Well yes, ignoring that the Fighter still has 6 other feats to assign.

And of course, ignoring that a sword-and-board fighter would be using a tower shield and a goddamn masterwork sword at level 11.

Hey maybe we should make this comparison more interesting by having the fighter fight naked or with both his legs chopped off. Certainly wouldn't make it less credible at this point.

Hadrian_Emrys

2007-10-15, 11:28 PM

Even crippling the fighter as much as you are in this, the monk is actually even less effective than credited for. How many stun attempts does the sod get at level 15 eh? I think he ends up taking down 6-7 instead. All this just goes to show just how sad and sorry the monk is currently.

galdon

2007-10-15, 11:31 PM

Honestly, if you send a raven to fly ahead and scout, well, what enemy is going to waste time shooting down a bird that's just flying in the air?

remmember when V sent his/her raven to inspect that camp...

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-16, 12:29 AM

...why would you assume no magical enhancement? That's unrelated to anything ever.

This is in response to this question and those related.

The fighter had a normal bastard sword, heavy shield, and full plate.

Yes, he was a gimped fighter build, and yes, taking away magic gear makes him even more gimped. That was kinda the point.

Monk comes close to being even against a gimped fighter build. That was the point of the exercise. I actually expected the monk would surpass the fighter in that scenario, but that was not the case. The monk wasn't exactly optimized either.

I may post the optimized level 11 comparison w/equipment against a warrior that also has appropriate equipment for a level 10 NPC. Maybe even later tonight. I think that proper build will push the fighter even farther ahead, but I will make it fair and keep the fighter locked into B. Sword/Shield, and both core only.

Fighter: normal Bastard Sword, Heavy Shield, Full Plate
WF, GWF, WS, PA, EWP, misc. other feats (5)

Monk: gains no benefit from mundane equipment, and thus has none
Stunning Fist, Improved Disarm, Deflect Arrows, misc. other feats (4)

triforcel

2007-10-16, 12:31 AM

Could you give the feat selection for all three of them though?

Dode

2007-10-16, 12:38 AM

This is in response to this question and those related.

The fighter had a normal bastard sword, heavy shield, and full plate.

Yes, he was a gimped fighter build, and yes, taking away magic gear makes him even more gimped. That was kinda the point. You gimped him further by denying him standard fighter equipment. No tower shield, no masterwork sword. What was your point? That you're incapable of making relevant comparisons between classes and instead have to resort to ludicrous scenarios for the Monk to still fall short of?

Monk comes close to being even against a gimped fighter build. That was the point of the exercise. I actually expected the monk would surpass the fighter in that scenario, but that was not the case. The monk wasn't exactly optimized either. Uh-huh, you just happened to pick the exact level Monk gained access to Greater Flurry randomly?

I think that proper build will push the fighter even farther ahead, but I will make it fair and keep the fighter locked into B. Sword/Shield, and both core only. hahahahahaha

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-16, 04:11 AM

You gimped him further by denying him standard fighter equipment. No tower shield, no masterwork sword. What was your point? That you're incapable of making relevant comparisons between classes and instead have to resort to ludicrous scenarios for the Monk to still fall short of?

What makes you think I was defending the monk with that analysis?

anywhoo, here is my actual level 11 statistical analysis. I even threw in a
2HW fighter, for good measure. The monk is the only one anywhere close to optimized. This is not a defence of the monk, but the monk makes an OK showing compared to the horrible travesty of the sub-optimal sword/board fighter. The suboptimal 2HW fighter shows him up quite a bit though. In spite of level 11 being what should be the sweet spot for the monk.

Before I start, I have way too much time on my hands. Don't we all, as gamers, have too much time on our collective hands?

I statted up three characters, a somewhat gimped level 11 sword/board fighter, a optimized monk with a few questionable calls in favor of the monk, and an OKmeh 2HW fighter. They are all being matched up against the Ogre Barbarian in a survival-match style set up. All are assumed to be trying their best to be hidden as well. I am also assuming optimum power attack usage via the power attack calculator at http://direpress.bin.sh/tools/power.html
I applied this to the Ogre as well.

Fighter: http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=1627
Monk: http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=1628
Glaive fighter: http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=1630

Results:
Fighter vs. Ogre
The Ogre will either surprise the fighter or beat his initiative 63% of the time. This allows the Ogre to Ready an Action to attack the fighter when he gets into range, and to rage as well.
The Ogre deals an average of 34 dmg in the first round, and 21 damage on subsequent rounds. The fighter deals 20 damage in the first round, and 47 damage on subsequent rounds. It takes the fighter 3 rounds to drop the Ogre.

When the fighter goes first, he moves into the ogres threat range before it can act, thus bypassing the AoO. He deals 18 damage in the first round, which is less, because the Ogre's AC is higher from not having raged. He then deals 47 dmg/rnd, and takes 21 dmg/rnd.

All told, the true average damage per Ogre the fighter takes is 59, taking into account optimum manuevering, power attack usage, critical hits, and the odds of the fighter losing initiative.

The fighter can take 1 Ogre w/o dying, and can take 2 ogres 50% of the time.

Monk vs. Ogre
It is impossible for the Ogre to get the jump on the monk, and its odds of noticing the monk and then beating its initiative are too small to even consider. The monk goes first, every time.

The monk's best option is to open the fight with a shuriken flurry, because he doesn't want the Ogre to get the first Full Attack. His average damage is 6 from this. The Ogre then charges, enraged, and deals an average of 14 damage. The monk then full attacks with unarmed strikes, and deals an average of 30 damage. The Ogre then deals 16 damage on average with its full attack. It takes the monk 5 rounds to kill the Ogre. The Ogre has a 32% chance of failing the Fort save against the monk's stunning fist, so it loses a turn due to being stunned, and likely dies from the monk's AoO from picking its club up again.

The monk takes an average of 49dmg/Ogre (this takes into account the 20% chance the monk will miss on his AoO when the Ogre picks up his club to attack again. It is 46 dmg/Ogre if he never misses that attack). Because he can heal 22dmg/day, the monk can take 2 ogres w/o dying. He gets killed by the second Ogre 20% of the time, if he misses that crucial AoO.

Note- yes, the axiomatic weapon seems tailored to the encounter. However, I picked axiomatic before I picked the encounter, and flaming/shocking would net the same damage for the same cost.

Glaive fighter v. Ogre

The Ogre has a 30% chance of going first. Its best option is to move up and attack. Since he hasn't acted yet, the fighter's glaive is set to defend +4, and his AC is 25. The average damage for the Ogre is 17. The fighter then switches his glaive to attack +1/defence +3, and full attacks for 54 average damage, while keeping his AC at 25. The Ogre then full attacks for 28 dmg. The fighter then switches to full offence, and full attacks for 71 dmg, killing the Ogre.

Avg. Damage per Ogre that goes first; 45

If the fighter goes first, he moves in on the , fighting defensively. He deals 23 damage on average, and then the Ogre retaliates for 31 average damage. The fighter than full attacks for 71 avg. damage, killing the ogre.

Avg. Damage per Ogre that goes second; 31.

True avg. damage per Ogre: ~36 (35.6)

2HWFighter can probably take 3 ogres before dying. The last Ogre might take him down.

In conclusion:
Core only, fighting the Ogre Barbarian

Optimized monk: ~2 Ogres in one day
Sword and Board Fighter: 1-2 Ogres in one day
2HW fighter: ~3 Ogres in one day

Neither Fighter is particularly optimal in build. I squeezed as much as I could out of the monk.

Armads

2007-10-16, 05:13 AM

I notice that the sub optimal Sword and Board fighter guy took Athletic, Cleave, and Skill focus, and burnt 53k on a sword that is largely useless, while the glaive wielder bought a +5 glaive?

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-16, 05:35 AM

And the Glaive fighter has Toughness. Fighter burn out syndrome is a real issue in core-only. +3 axiomatic isn't horrible against CE ogre barbarians. They both bought +5 weapons. Honestly, the 2HW fighter was meant to be more effective, but as a straight fighter, ran out of ways to up his to-hit (and thus his damage via PA). Not that 70-80 dmg/rnd is too terribly shabby for a level 11 core only fighter.

triforcel

2007-10-17, 08:39 PM

I've been looking over your scenarios in my free time (which I get very little of during the middle of the week) and I've got a few issues with them. First of is the scenario with the warrior, I couldn't check all your calculations because I never got the feat choices for the three of them, but you did have the warrior with a average base attack bonus instead of a good one, and a d10 hit die instead of the d8 that they actually get.

In the ogre set, my main concern is that you're using the power attack calculator, which while a handy tool for showing the proper time to use the feat and to what extent, it requires that you have the AC of the target. I shouldn't have to tell you what's wrong with knowing the exact armor class of your opponent at your disposal.

Thirdly, and this concerns both scenarios, you're not playing the monk properly. Even when you use flurry of blows, you are able to see whether or not the first attack succeeded before deciding on the second. So if the first attack failed to stun the opponent any monk in the situation you put them in would attempt a stunning fist on the next attack, and failing that the one after.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-17, 09:06 PM

So if the first attack failed to stun the opponent any monk in the situation you put them in would attempt a stunning fist on the next attack, and failing that the one after.

You can only make one stunning fist attempt in a round, w/o the benefit fo the Rapid Stunning Feat. I used only the core material in this demonstration, so that all options would be equally accessible for anyone to look at.

it requires that you have the AC of the target.

Which is potentially a problem for the Ogre's damage calculation, but not for the two fighters. It is pretty easy to tell/safe to assume that the Ogre is slow and ponderous (+0 dex), large size (-1 size), wearing hide armor (+3armor), and raging (-2 AC). It is safe to assume a +4-5 natural armor on a thickskinned creature like an Ogre. It really only has 2 'hidden' AC, in the form of the +1 enhancement on the hide armor, and the +1 RoP.

Any inclusion of power attack is going to be an arbitrary number anyway. May as well set it to the optimum amount, as this gives no advantage to the fighters, if you also have the Ogre PA for the optimum amount. The optimum amount against the monk being 0, I don't see how this tips the scales any.

I couldn't check all your calculations because I never got the feat choices for the three of them, but you did have the warrior with a average base attack bonus instead of a good one, and a d10 hit die instead of the d8 that they actually get.

Yes, well that was off the top of my head. I don't know why I miscaclulated the AB. :smalleek:

triforcel

2007-10-17, 09:19 PM

You can only make one stunning fist attempt in a round, w/o the benefit fo the Rapid Stunning Feat. I used only the core material in this demonstration, so that all options would be equally accessible for anyone to look at.

Ah, my mistake again. Don't you hate those little things hidden in a long paragraph? :smalltongue:

Which is potentially a problem for the Ogre's damage calculation, but not for the two fighters. It is pretty easy to tell/safe to assume that the Ogre is slow and ponderous (+0 dex), large size (-1 size), wearing hide armor (+3armor), and raging (-2 AC). It is safe to assume a +4-5 natural armor on a thickskinned creature like an Ogre. It really only has 2 'hidden' AC, in the form of the +1 enhancement on the hide armor, and the +1 RoP.

Any inclusion of power attack is going to be an arbitrary number anyway. May as well set it to the optimum amount, as this gives no advantage to the fighters, if you also have the Ogre PA for the optimum amount. The optimum amount against the monk being 0, I don't see how this tips the scales any.

Well it's pretty hard to tell when a character has magical bonuses to armor, so for all the fighters know the ogre could have had +5 armor and +5 ring. Additionally, if an ogre is fighting someone who is obviously not wearing armor, he'd probably power attack for full thinking he could hit the target easily and then pull back on it when he finds it's not as easy as he thinks, or not considering he's raging so he might be inclined to power attack as much as possible anyways.

Yes, well that was off the top of my head. I don't know why I miscaclulated the AB. :smalleek:

Eh, it's a mistake, and mistakes happen.

Skjaldbakka

2007-10-17, 09:31 PM

Well it's pretty hard to tell when a character has magical bonuses to armor, so for all the fighters know the ogre could have had +5 armor and +5 ring. Additionally, if an ogre is fighting someone who is obviously not wearing armor, he'd probably power attack for full thinking he could hit the target easily and then pull back on it when he finds it's not as easy as he thinks, or not considering he's raging so he might be inclined to power attack as much as possible anyways.

These are all considerations that you cannot count in a statistical analysis. I would have more people grousing about my inefficient use of Power Attack if I had designated a random number, like say, 5.

I find it to be a problem with Power Attack, really. There is too much thought that have to put into power attack, which is all meta-game thought. I would much prefer a power attack or not mechanic for power attack, as opposed to the specific amount of power attack method.

The fighter is not going to think the ogre has +5 magical protectives. If anything, they would assume no magical protectives.