Maybe I'm just not doing it right...

[The Extinguisher]

...but I don't get why so many people think the Monk sucks.

I really can't see it at all. Some explanation as to why would be really nice.

[tyckspoon]

.. seriously? You've been hanging around here since 2006 and you don't know why yet? Try searching. Keyword 'monk', search in titles only.

[serpent615]

I have a Monk in my current campaign, and he's well above week.

i got a +18 to hit, can hit 4 times a round, 23 Spell Resistance, actually managed 26 AC, and a few bonuses the DM added in because we were captured and had experiments done on us.

though I think it IS the DM adjustments that make him sweet...Str/Dex 20...Amulet of Mighty fist +3(really nice on a Monk)...and um, some minor psionic stuff like spider clime and a Kinetic barrier I can create around myself

[Solo]

...but I don't get why so many people think the Monk sucks.

I really can't see it at all. Some explanation as to why would be really nice.

1. No spellcasting.

2. MAD

3. Poor BAB for a class that will be grappling, tripping, disarming, etc, a lot.

4. Their special ability, flurry of blows, isn't useful until they reach a high level due to the penalty.


There are more.

[MCerberus]

In order to equal the AC of full plate, the Monk needs a WIS and DEX score of 18 making them easy prey before you can get magic items. The Monk is also a melee class (bad news at high levels), has a d8 (Fighters, Paladins, Rangers have d10, Babs d12), and they do not have full BaB progression. No matter how well you try and make it 2 weapon fighting and unarmed suck... for starters

[Green Bean]

1. No spellcasting.

2. MAD

3. Poor BAB for a class that will be grappling, tripping, disarming, etc, a lot.

4. Their special ability, flurry of blows, isn't useful until they reach a high level due to the penalty.


There are more.

I've read enough of these threads to contribute a couple more. :smallwink:

5. Despite popular misconception, Monks are often more dependant on expensive magic items than other classes, because they can't directly enchant their primary weapons.

6. Many of its special abilities are weak and/or unrelated to to its primary role (speaking languages? save or die once a week?)

[Temp]

Primarily, the Monk class is entirely based around defense--there's very little a Monk has as far as offensive abilities go beside Stunning Fist.

The Monk is given Improved Grapple/Trip/Disarm as bonus feats, which implies it's designed to use those abilities well. The Problem? Other classes with higher base attack bonuses and higher Strength scores do all of those better.

Which brings me to the statistic problem. With no armor, the Monk class relies entirely on Wisdom and Dexterity to keep himself from being hit. With no base attack, he relies entirely on Strength to hit and again on Wisdom to make the hit matter (via Stunning Fist). To actually survive the hits he's inevitably going to take, he relies on a high Constitution to supplement his d8 hit dice.

This means Monks need to blow a lot of money just to keep themselves somewhat functional.

The Monk has no way to easily increase his damage (no weapon to enhance) so he relies entirely on Stunning Fist. Stunning Fist usually won't work because it: a) can only be used once per round. b) requires a Fortitude save, the most common "good" save in the game.

Then the Monk's abilities have no synergy. He can run really fast OR he could teleport OR he could make his signature Flurry of Blows. They just don't work together.

...So hopefully this thread won't degrade into flame wars like most Monk threads.

...And I'm sure I took a few d6 Sudden Strike damage while typing this, but that's okay.

[Azerian Kelimon]

And we're forgetting that you can't place enchantmens on your fists (there are ways to circumvent that, though), we're not counting magical enhancements, you're NOT getting the special protections from armor, that everything a monk does, swordsage can do it better, particularly if you take the unarmed variant, etc.

[Quirinus_Obsidian]

...but I don't get why so many people think the Monk sucks.

I really can't see it at all. Some explanation as to why would be really nice.

It is generally conceived in the world of some DnD players that everything except the Wizard sucks; some classes are considered to suck to a greater degree. :confused:

Monks, sadly, are lumped into this category. :frown: It is mostly because you are held to the same abilities for each level. The benefits to the class are good; increased damage, good speed, decent skills, and armor bonuses. The monk can be "fixed", however; by locating variants (such as Decisive Strike, Tiger Shen, etc.).

[The Extinguisher]

I can see why they aren't the optimal class, but everytime I create a monk character, I get people (not on this forum, mind you) that shout at me to not due it because monks suck.

I find them pretty useful.
Then again, I'm not one to play a class because it's the very best class to take.

And I like Melee. I don't have to keep track of what spells do what, and what would be useful to us in what situations, and etc.

[serpent615]

Personally, i believe it will be much better in 4th edition. After the outbreak of people who don't like it...

[Temp]

It is generally conceived in the world of some DnD players that everything except the Wizard sucks; some classes are considered to suck to a greater degree.

Monks, sadly, are lumped into this category.That's hardly a fair implication; the Monk is a horribly designed class, just like the Arcane Archer or the Truenamer.

[horseboy]

It doesn't suck, well, not in those two ways, anyway. It just lags far behind without a significant helping of DM fiat. Thereby "dragging down" the over all effectiveness of the group.

They can be/are fun to play, but the party has to "power down" to keep from leaving him behind.

[Green Bean]

I can see why they aren't the optimal class, but everytime I create a monk character, I get people (not on this forum, mind you) that shout at me to not due it because monks suck.

I find them pretty useful.
Then again, I'm not one to play a class because it's the very best class to take.

And I like Melee. I don't have to keep track of what spells do what, and what would be useful to us in what situations, and etc.

The biggest problem with the monk is that it's such a defencive class. At mid to mid-high levels, you should be able to avoid attacks fairly reliably, and your saves won't be half bad either. Of course, that's all at the cost of offencive capabilities. Your damage will be minimal, and the rarity of full attacks in mobile battles means that most of the time you won't be making multiple attacks to compensate. Plus, low BaB and to-hit means things like Disarm and Trip will be tough to pull off.

Sure, you're offensively weak, but being pretty good defensively makes up for it, right? Sure, if you're playing solo. If you're playing in a party, every extra round it takes to kill a foe is an extra round they can use to ignore your attacks and go after the squishier targets. Monks aren't predisposed to being team players.

[Vva70]

I can see why they aren't the optimal class, but everytime I create a monk character, I get people (not on this forum, mind you) that shout at me to not due it because monks suck.

I find them pretty useful.
Then again, I'm not one to play a class because it's the very best class to take.

And I like Melee. I don't have to keep track of what spells do what, and what would be useful to us in what situations, and etc.

First of all, there's absolutely nothing wrong with choosing a class because you like it, rather than because it's "the very best class to take." More power to you.

That said, I'm curious as to what they do that you find useful. One of the major problems with the monk is that they have difficulty fitting into a group dynamic because their abilities branch in different directions and don't have much synergy. Movement speed, flurry of blows, grappling (with 3/4 BAB, ouch), teleport, etc. don't really support each other. A monk has trouble being a mobile combatant for lack of swift damage. He isn't a grappler because he has trouble making the grapple checks. He could be a caster-killer, but only if the caster he is up against is played poorly.

If it were the flavor you liked, I would suggest the swordsage, who can be built as a better monkish character than the monk. That wouldn't mesh well with your desire to not have to keep track of things though.

[Dragonmuncher]

There's another problem with flurry of blows, which I'm surprised no one's mentioned- it takes a full attack to use, yet everything about the monk from its low Hit Die to its medium BAB to its speed screams "mobility fighter."

Standing toe to toe to use the Monk's most iconic ability is a good way to get said Monk killed.

Personally, I like the psychic warrior for my "warrior that can do a few supernatural things." Much better designed class, IMO. The ToB stuff is pretty neat, too.

But if you like monk, stick with it. Just because it's not the best designed class doesn't mean it can't be fun.

[Zincorium]

I can see why they aren't the optimal class, but everytime I create a monk character, I get people (not on this forum, mind you) that shout at me to not due it because monks suck.

They might, or it might be a matter of perception. There are a lot of specific actions that you will probably not succeed with by using a monk (grapple checks are a common one) and if those tasks are the entire point of the character, monk is a bad choice.

As far as the monk/swordsage thing goes, swordsages are just more powerful, more flexible, and have a wider range of fluff possibilities. So given the option of using ToB, I personally would not want to be a monk.


I find them pretty useful.
Then again, I'm not one to play a class because it's the very best class to take.

That's fine, BUT don't assume that everyone else is a munchkin because they recognize the weaknesses of a class that has several.


And I like Melee. I don't have to keep track of what spells do what, and what would be useful to us in what situations, and etc.

Hey, I'm with you on liking melee. Heck, Logic Ninja, the guy who wrote the infamous guide to winning with wizards, was also a fan.

There's just a visceral thrill to beating something to a pulp without worrying about what type of resource you're using.