Monks... any good?

[Sir Giacomo]

Casters can craft wands, too.

Yes, but only at later levels.


I'm not sure why your level 4 monk has a wand of Ray of Enfeeblement. Does he plan to stand around failing his UMD check for a round or two while pointing it at the opponent?

Hmm, true. Would not make that much use yet to have it at those levels, you are correct.


I'm also not sure why he has a wand of CLW. That's what clerics are for. Parties buy a wand with pooled funds.

Oh, OK, another 750 gp less. It greatly helps everyone, though, that the monk can use it in case the cleric is out.


Enlarge is the obvious choice, and it helps... but you're going to need it every fight. You'll blow through that wand before level 6 or 7.

Even IF (and that is a grand "IF") the monk needs enlarge for every encounter, 750gp per 50 (!) uses means he can easily afford a new one at level 6 or 7.


Maybe you didn't notice this, Gia, but most parties have stealth.

Why then did you forget about it when you thought it's impossible for the monk to sneak up on two stone giants?


WOOOO, condescenscion!
You were still assuming that *every* attack would hit... when you had one that would miss 25% and another that would miss 50% of the time.

Have I? Wouldn't the attacks that SAFELY hit be enough for two stone gianst? Why bring up this long proven non-monk-suckage example up again and again on such irrelvant details?


You presented a monk to bring down a dragon... by spending a long time buffing and then using a crossbow. A Warrior could have done pretty much the same thing. Your build didn't impress anyone, because it required setting up round after round of short-term buffs (and you had no counter to the dragon... you know... *waiting your buffs out*, like you're so fond of suggesting *one* member of a *party* do to his opponents). I guess that means Warriors are viable, too?

Guys, the thread is here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68095&page=4). The level 20 build used a crossbow, to show you a monk can even contribute at range (quite a good idea vs a dragon). The 2nd one used melee.


One of his slots means you get it ONCE per day. But you NEED it FOUR times a day.

Who ever said I NEED it four times/day?


And yes, you'd better get that pearl (that ring is effectively 66k out of 260,000 gp now--again, what are you NOT buying that everyone else is), because the cleric is ALREADY giving you a 4th level slot for GMW--and the Fighter needs one, too. And he needs to prep Death Ward and Freedom of Movement. And let's not forget Divine Power for himself, since he doesn't want to just sit things out.

Sure.


A wand starts to be affordable at that level... but here's something you haven't answered: when did you first get that wand, Giacomo? How many wands have you already gone through? Divine power is so very important to you--and yet, somehow, you magically never use it except on this *one* encounter? No, you'd need it all the time. You'd have blown through 50 charges by level 16. Maybe 100 or 150. That's in line with real consumables expenditure, and raises the cost to that of several wands.
And speaking of several wands, your character has been using more than just the wand of Divine Power. What other wands has he been spending money on?
This is what makes it obvious you haven't ever tried to pull this in a real game: you'd realize it's a lot more expensive than buying a single wand at a high level when you've needed that wand all along.

50 times having the great joy of proving you wrong in outdamaging your barbarian is enough for one campaign :smallbiggrin:


YES, there is! What's that orc's AC? It's crap. He'll grapple or attack one creature and another will tear him to shreds. (Your proposed monk had a 10 CON by the way, which is AWFUL for a melee character. He'd die. Fast.)

Did you read my post above that a fighter's advantage over a monk is the ability to tackle several foes at ones? You apparently did not.
And low CON is a problem if you get hit often, yes. How again does the wizard avoid being killed despite his lower hp?


Magic item trading? Yes. Feel free to buy.

Thanks. That's my whole point.


Buying the spell from an NPC costs a "mere" 280 GP... but if you do it 4 times a day every day, that's suddenly over 1000 GP a day on top of your ring.

Well, getting the pearl costs 16,000. Occasionally the party cleric MIGHT get a pity on the monk, wouldn't he? Ah wait...it's not pity, it's intelligent play - because through transferring his divine power buff on the monk, he'll do way more damage than with any other of his 4th level spells.


Also, *where do you get this NPC*? Adventurers ADVENTURE, Giacomo. EVEN IN a city adventure, you can't necessarily just buy whatever spell you want between fights (which might take place in, say, different parts of the same complex, or outside a building and then inside, or etc). And if you're in a dungeon or in the wilderness... like you are most of the time... then what?

Ask the pc cleric? Btw for the four divine powers per day, that would cost 64,000. 114,000 to have the divine power 4/day. Hmmm. Equal to having it via wand over 250 times. That should answer your "how many wands are you able to buy" bit. You can buy a lot.


Against really big strong things (that outgrapple even a grapple specialist), and against the movement-limiting spells and abilities out there, he *does* need a Ring of FoM. Everyone needs that thing. It's delicious cake.

Yes, but some more than others.


I got that notion from you always talking about high-DEX monks, and from high-STR monks having a low AC (coupled with that low CON score, that means death) right up until they can start spending level 19-20 WBL on it. This is why people want to see actual builds (and not "my STR is X therefore I do X damage to anything"). Seriously, build a strength monk if you think they're better--level 16 if you like, and then what he'd have looked like at levels, say, 5 and 10. Not to buy 5 buffs and then one-shot a sitting-duck dragon, to function in a party.
That should be easy; start from the lowest level and then up the character several levels.
I'll be interested in how many wands he's burned through between 10 and 16, too.

No, emeraldstreak had a good idea. YOU post a monk build here that caused you so much hate. YOU have to actually prove your opinion that a monk sucks. And we will see what we can do for you.:smallsmile:

And despite the 1-charge wands being RAW, I do see your point in terms of their place vs scrolls. Will think on it

- Giacomo

[Reel On, Love]

See the edits to my above post, where I complete several sentences (and show you what kind of grappling you're up against).


Yes, but only at later levels.
From level, what, 5 on? Somehow, I REALLY DOUBT that the purpose of level 1-4 scrolls is just to give casters something to make for themselves from levels 1-4.


Hmm, true. Would not make that much use yet to have it at those levels, you are correct.
And at 1d6+1 with no chance of beating SR, you probably shouldn't buy one of these, well, ever. I can see what you were thinking--drain their STR, then grapple them--but this is just a bad move.


Oh, OK, another 750 gp less. It greatly helps everyone, though, that the monk can use it in case the cleric is out.
The rogue can already do that.


Even IF (and that is a grand "IF") the monk needs enlarge for every encounter, 750gp per 50 (!) uses means he can easily afford a new one at level 6 or 7.
Do you want to calculate that monk's stats *without* Enlarge?


Why then did you forget about it when you thought it's impossible for the monk to sneak up on two stone giants?
Maybe the giants are somewhere where they can see the party coming. Maybe they and the PCs just ran into each other. Maybe there were the guards of someone you were talking to.

The point was, almost ALL parties have a scout. And yet, SOMEHOW, it is NOT common that adventurers get a chance to spend as long as they want activating buffs ahead of time. (When they do, it's usually when they're kicking down a BBEG or at least LBEG's door.)


Have I? Wouldn't the attacks that SAFELY hit be enough for two stone gianst? Why bring up this long proven non-monk-suckage example up again and again on such irrelvant details?
For the CR 8 stone giants? Sure. I'm not bring the example up as Monks Suck, I'm bringing it up as Giacomo Is Dishonest And Likes To Gloss Over Any Problems. You don't always hit; posting damage calculations as though you DO is pointless. For the record, you posted the damage calculationBEFORE stone giants were mentioned.


Guys, the thread is here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68095&page=4). The level 20 build used a crossbow, to show you a monk can even contribute at range (quite a good idea vs a dragon). The 2nd one used melee.
The 2nd one was not going to succeed.
The crossbow build could have been a Warrior, and here's the kicker: to showus that a monk can contribute at range, you needed to build specifically for it, and get rounds and ROUNDS of buffing. How is that monk supposed to have contributed until then? Does he ever melee?


Who ever said I NEED it four times/day?
Without it, you're losing, at level 16, +7 to attack and grapple, and an extra attack a round. So, yes--you NEED it 4 times a day. Once you build a monk, you'll see the stats without it.


Sure.

50 times having the great joy of proving you wrong in outdamaging your barbarian is enough for one campaign :smallbiggrin:
I never built a Barbarian. If I did, he'd outdamage the monk.


Did you read my post above that a fighter's advantage over a monk is the ability to tackle several foes at ones? You apparently did not.
And low CON is a problem if you get hit often, yes. How again does the wizard avoid being killed despite his lower hp?
Oh, I see! So the monk is only effective when there's only ONE cr-appropriate enemy! If there's several, they can just kill him!
I'm glad you realize that.
So tell me... when does the party even care about one CR-appropriate enemy? If you're only fighting ONE enemy, odds are it's several points of CR above you, and it has to be, due to action efficiency (4 or 5 standard actions vs. the monster's 1).
So the monk can't fight multiple right-CR enemies because he'll die, and he can't fight single higher-CR enemies because good luck hurting them or grappling them.
This is my point.

The wizard avoids getting hit (a 14-CON wizard has the same HP as your monk, BTW. A 16-CON wizard has MORE) by NOT BEING A FREAKING FRONT-LINE GRAPPLER! Duh! Did you seriously ask that? he also avoids that by being an invisible flyer all the way over there.

I'm surprised you haven't tried to save your monk by suggesting he doesn't need CON because he can have Greater Invisibility up every fight. (Eyeroll.)


Thanks. That's my whole point.
See above. Feel free to buy... except that that applies to LISTED ITEMS. Not "anything I might dream some adventuring party having found and sold". You can't buy partially charged wands of whatever you want at whatever charges you want.

The fact that you try to say it was an intentional design decision, so that good players could buy lots of 1-charge wands and chuckle about their skill and how useless scrolls are? That just makes it clear how far you're willing to stretch to support ridiculous points. You KNOW, if you'd just be honest and admit it, that no, 1-charge wands are NOT meant to replace scrolls. Or to be bought freely at all (which is why no DM would allow it).

You then suggest that, in fact, game balance IN ITS ENTIRETY rests on 1-charge wands being availible!
(You'd think that they wouldn't require the monk to take two feats, buy an item, and use 2 skill points/level, plus have to prepare before every fight, JUST for the sake of balancing himself with everyone else.)


Well, getting the pearl costs 16,000. Occasionally the party cleric MIGHT get a pity on the monk, wouldn't he? Ah wait...it's not pity, it's intelligent play - because through transferring his divine power buff on the monk, he'll do way more damage than with any other of his 4th level spells.
Unless he casts GMW on the Fighter, which lasts ALL DAY. Or unless he wants to, say, SAVE LIVES, like Death Ward and Freedom of Movement do.
He's already giving you a GMW out of pity. 4th level slots are in really high demand. He's probably tossing Magic Vestments around like candy, though!


Ask the pc cleric? Btw for the four divine powers per day, that would cost 64,000. 114,000 to have the divine power 4/day. Hmmm. Equal to having it via wand over 250 times. That should answer your "how many wands are you able to buy" bit. You can buy a lot.
...
Is your 16th level character REALLY spending half his WBL on a Ring of Spell Storing and four Pearls of Power? Somehow, I've never seen that happen.
That's my point. You can't AFFORD that many wands. You need AC, AB, saves, Ring of Freedom, FLIGHT, etc.


Yes, but some more than others.
Fogs, big creatures (with Improved Grab/Snatch), a whole *host* of effects. If you'd ever played in higher-level games you'd know how important this is.
Flight is another big one.


No, emeraldstreak had a good idea. YOU post a monk build here that caused you so much hate. YOU have to actually prove your opinion that a monk sucks. And we will see what we can do for you.:smallsmile:

And despite the 1-charge wands being RAW, I do see your point in terms of their place vs scrolls. Will think on it

- Giacomo
The first monk I ever played was much like you're talking about, actually. Split between DEX and STR, kinda low CON (mine was 12), Improved Grapple, stunning fist, stealth. From levels one or two to... five or so?
I can work up a reasonable fascimile; I don't remember that one's exact stats.

The next one was a typical weapon-finesse-having crank-DEX type

I'll work up a couple of monk builds (probably today), but I'm not the one claiming they're strong. You're really the person who should be posting builds.


1-charge wands remain NOT RAW. They're not listed. By strict RAW, you can only sell them, not buy back the ones you sold. That's unreasonable: anyone would allow you to buy back the ones you found and sold. That is NOT equivalent to being able to buy ANY 1-charge wand.
(Do you really think that allowing lower-level characters to get a low-activation-DC 4th-level spell charge for 420 gp makes the game MORE balanced? Or does it just lead to, oh, 2nd-level characters pulling a 1-charge Wand of Black Tentacles/Flamestrike/etc out at the mini-boss?)

[Sir Giacomo]

And what about the Familiar with a 14 Wis who can use your skill ranks (and sometimes cross classing spot is used), or Alertness Feat and +2 Elven Bonus..

That is actually a good point. While the shared skill rank 0 is still a skill rank of 0, the alertness feat is quite OK, but more importantly: an owl has an own listen check of +14, so it will be a good alerter at low-mid levels (a monk hidiing within a partial charge range of 30ft will mean -3 at the beginning, though). Plus, the familiar will have to be outside the wizard'S warming robes and thus vulnerable for attack...:smallwink: A wand of silence negates this, but still, it's quite useful.


Or the fact that there is usually a Rogue or Druid standing nearby with a +3-14 modifier for Spot/Listen.

That's not relevant for this direct comparison.


Personally, I'm still titillated by the realization that my Wizards have as much HP as your Monks.

But they don't...:smallsmile: The monk is always 4 hp ahead...(max first level). Meanwhile, your wizard will be highly vulnerable to any will-save based attack going his way. Or rays of enfeeblement, for that matter...

- Giacomo

[Reel On, Love]

But they don't...:smallsmile: The monk is always 4 hp ahead...(max first level). Meanwhile, your wizard will be highly vulnerable to any will-save based attack going his way. Or rays of enfeeblement, for that matter...

- Giacomo

The monk starts 4 HP ahead. Where the monk buys STR/WIS/DEX boosts, the wizard buys INT/CON boosts and gets ahead.

The wizard is VULNERABLE to will-saves? No, he's really not. Who targets wizards' STRONG saves? I think you mean "Fortitude" saves, and wizards can cover that weakness,like most other.
As for ray of enfeeblement... everything the wizard carries is in the Handy Haversack. He's not wearing armor. And moving more slowly isn't that big a hindrance when he's Back There and Up There.


Besides which, this is classic Giacomo. "My wizard has as much HP as your monk!" "But, HA, I have FOUR MORE HIT POINTS!"
Even if that remained true, HAVING AS MUCH HP AS THE WIZARD +4 IS *NOT OKAY* FOR A FRONT-LINE CHARACTER!

[Talic]

Wrong. All I'm saying is he can keep up with them. Do you really think I believe a monk able to do more damage for 7 rounds in a day is stronger consistently at sheer damage output than the barbarian at level 16? It only illustrates that, yes, the monk is versatile and yes, he can contribute. But I never heap contempt on any class like you do on the monk (and thus implicitly, on all who think playing a monk is a good idea because they believe what he does helps the group).
No, you haven't. Reread your own posts. You say, "monk is better at this" or "monk does more damage than that". That's not an arguement for parity. Contradicting yourself hardly improves your credibility.


I never said that. I only said that beyond core, it's impossible preserve the balance, since saying what companions (and there is no separate WoTC monk companion btw) are used is highly arbitrary and depends on taste.
Inside core, it's impossible to preserve balance. Balance is a myth. The reason the game has a moderator is to preserve balance. Rules can't do it.

Please read this thread again. Read how many posters in essence simply say "monk sucks because I say so/"it has been proven x times", while some others (including me) actually provide numbers and rules clarifications.
The best example is Kurald Galain's recent UMD reality denial, or your posting of a weretiger barbarian to show that class is better than the monk. THAT is what I would call clinging to some outdated belief so desperately, it is starting to become funny. Monks are less effective than other classes at what they try to do. Monks further, if they try to compete with another class for its specialty, lose out on any flexibility that they may have had. In other words, monk can either be a 3rd rate anything, or a 2nd rate 1 thing.

Come on, Talic, you are currently DMing a highly entertaining level 20 adventure with a monk and a barbarian. Abstracting from the enlarge person potion error, do you really think the monk contributes less there than the barbarian so far?
- Giacomo
Yes, I do. The monk has been less able to deal damage consistently, whether that be because of DR, incorporeal foes, or what have you. It's been a different "reason" every time, but thus far, the monk has proven MORE dependent on magical gear, less able to function without it, and more ineffective than any other class there. The casters, unsurprisingly, have had the majority of the impact, but the barbarian has done the majority of the melee damage. So yes, I'd say that the monk is less able to contribute than the other classes, thus far. He's doing a fine backup job for a rogue, with the exception of being unable to detect or disarm the traps on chests, or unlock the locks on them. He looks like he was designed to be a light scout, but honestly, I think the party would be moving faster with another tank type, or a rogue or bard.

[Talic]

That is actually a good point. While the shared skill rank 0 is still a skill rank of 0, the alertness feat is quite OK, but more importantly: an owl has an own listen check of +14, so it will be a good alerter at low-mid levels (a monk hidiing within a partial charge range of 30ft will mean -3 at the beginning, though). Plus, the familiar will have to be outside the wizard'S warming robes and thus vulnerable for attack...:smallwink: A wand of silence negates this, but still, it's quite useful.

At low-mid levels, a wand of silence will break any PC or NPC involved. Wands of level 1 spells are 750g. Silence is not a level 1 spell.
[/QUOTE]

[Sir Giacomo]

And now you're suggesting that you're going to grapple things to death as your main strategy. At level 16. Really.
The planetar, unbuffed (Righteous Might?) has +25 grapple... and SLAs like Power Word Stun. And Cleric 17 spellcasting (including Implosion against your 10-CON monk). But then, Planetars are notoriously overpowered as enemies.
The Old black dragon has +42 grapple before buffs. I think it wins.
The Horned Devil has +29... and TELEPORT AT WILL. Oh, and good luck making the Fort save vs. its chain stun with your 10 CON. (10 CON! Seriously, 10 CON?)
The Greater Stone Golem has +52 grapple. Bet you wish you'd bought that Ring of Freedom of Movement instead of that Ring of Spell Storing now.
The Nightwalker, with a +34, is probably the most grappleable.

CR 17? The Aboleth Mage spellcasts, the Marilith has +29, lots of attacks, and (oops) *teleport at will*, the Formian Queen (as if it mattered--man, has anyone EVER fought one of these? Seriously, I don't think this monster has ever been used) spellcasts, the Frost Giant Jarl has +33, +35 after Bull's Strength (there we go, might be able to get that one)...

CR 18 is a bunch of dragons and the +45 Nightcrawler.

...so, yeah--you might wanna rethink this whole grappling strategy.


Hmm - maybe the grappling specialist lord_khaine wishes to answer to this?

Grapple mods of +30 to +52 sound quite big. And without the core rules polymorph stuff the rules offer no big way to beat those critters at grappling.

Or is there?
+16 BAB, +15 STR from the Orc commoner example, +4 enlarge, +4 improved grapple...hmmm +39. Enough to compete, but not really win consistently.

OK, flurry it is.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

[emeraldstreak]

But compare it to what even the Fighter can do (Karmic-Striking Combat-Reflexes-having Knockbacking Shock Trooper Combat Brute) at the same level of optimization and it pales.


That's our point of disagreement then. I believe there are monk builds that don't pale in comparison to this fighter build (or similarly powerful fighter or barbarian builds).

[Sir Giacomo]

Besides which, this is classic Giacomo. "My wizard has as much HP as your monk!" "But, HA, I have FOUR MORE HIT POINTS!"
Even if that remained true, HAVING AS MUCH HP AS THE WIZARD +4 IS *NOT OKAY* FOR A FRONT-LINE CHARACTER!

OK, because you make such a big issue of it and to keep it consistent (so far I basically advocated in this thread a more melee-combat-oriented monk)
STR 14, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 14, CHR 10

Is that better?

- Giacomo

[emeraldstreak]

About the gauntlet: I'll need to write a longish rationale as setup, so it might take a while before I have the time. I'm thinking about focusing on melee builds, with monks, fighters, barbarians, paladins, melee rangers, and melee rogues allowed to participate.

[Kurald Galain]

OK, because you make such a big issue of it and to keep it consistent (so far I basically advocated in this thread a more melee-combat-oriented monk)

So you consider a Skill Focus feat and high intelligence score to fall under "melee combat orientation"?

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

That is actually a good point. While the shared skill rank 0 is still a skill rank of 0, the alertness feat is quite OK, but more importantly: an owl has an own listen check of +14, so it will be a good alerter at low-mid levels (a monk hidiing within a partial charge range of 30ft will mean -3 at the beginning, though). Plus, the familiar will have to be outside the wizard'S warming robes and thus vulnerable for attack...:smallwink: A wand of silence negates this, but still, it's quite useful.

1) A wand of Silence? And by the time you can afford that, much less actually spent WBL on something so situational I'll be flying (from Overland Flight, just to be clear) because you'd be a fool to waste your money on a wand of silence, when you already need to buy all the things everyone else is buying, your other four-hundred wands, and the fact that you would then be wasting those skill points you put in MS.

2) Yes a Monk hiding withing Partial Charge range is -3, but he also has to move up to that position at half speed, making several checks and he needs concealment or cover the whole time. Doesn't that suck.

3) And Wizards can't cross class? Or is that just Monks that can do that?

And now with the change of stats, we can even take away more skill points, down to five. Of course, if you still change your build depending on the discussion at hand, you are still play Schroedinger games.

You monk has 5 skill points per level, my Wizard has 7 skill points per level.

You need:
UMD
Hide
MS
Tumble
One other thing.I have:
UMD
Spot
Spellcraft
Concentration
Knowledge Arcana
Tumble
Something else?Why do I have those? Simple, I can tumble away from AoO at later levels, just in case, I have a pretty decent Spot (Alertness+ Elf+ ranks), so does my familiar (Ranks+Wisdom) and we both get a check, oh and by the way, my familiar, not an Owl. He's a Raven, and he can UMD wands all day. Yeah, I give my Familiar a 20% chance of beating your Monk. I mean, it's the same buffs, he just also uses a 1 charge wand of Expeditious Retreat and Polymorph to pick up Monk Speed/Monk AC/and Monk Damage. Sure he only has half as much HP as you, but this is a familiar. He doesn't even have to do anything but keep you from killing me for one round while I do the real stuff.


That's not relevant for this direct comparison.

No, but it is relevant for the usefulness of the classes.


But they don't...:smallsmile: The monk is always 4 hp ahead...(max first level). Meanwhile, your wizard will be highly vulnerable to any will-save based attack going his way. Or rays of enfeeblement, for that matter...

The Monk is always 4HP ahead of a Wizard (Even though of course he can't afford to keep up with the Wizards WBL on Con, since he has to buy 400 wands, and stat boosters for 3 other stats.) But the Wizard is 100ft-200ft away, flying, invisible, blinking Not attempting to Grapple something bigger then him so that something else bigger them him can attack his flat-footed AC.

Please re-evaluate that statement, especially since I'll be going into LoreMaster at level 8, which means my Will save will go from being one less then your Fort, to one more then it. So does that mean you are vulnerable to Fort saves? If so, I'll starting handing you a list of fun spells your Monk won't enjoy. Either you are going to turn into a Squirrel, or I don't need to worry about Will Saves.

And Ray of Enfeeblement can't actually do anything to me, because I will always remain at 1 Str, and have most thing in my Handy Haversack, allowing me to fly around at 60ft-90ft per 3 seconds while enfeebled.

Oh, guess what else Loremaster gets me. UMD as a class skill and 4+Int skill points. Now my familiar is an even better wand whore then you, and he can even revive/stabilize me if I go down. And I'm better with wands then you too, so if the Cleric goes down, better to have the instant success then your fumbling for 2-3 rounds.

[Sir Giacomo]

1And Ray of Enfeeblement can't actually do anything to me, because I will always remain at 1 Str, and have most thing in my Handy Haversack, allowing me to fly around at 60ft per 3 seconds while enfeebled.

Getting tired now. Just this: you fly again how 24/7 at 60ft speed?

- Giacomo

EDIT: most of whatever came up in the more recent monk suckage posts I'll better try to address with my monk build. Wait and see...

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Just this: you fly again how 24/7 at 60ft speed?

Did you see the words 24/7? I can cast fly over Overland Flight. and have both if I need it. I can also cast Expeditious Retreat and get a 70ft-90ft fly speed.

And besides that there is Persistent Spell, Elemental Body and Polymorph any Object. Some of those may not be core, but I'm not obscenely wedded to Core like you, so I have no problem recognizing those options.


Getting tired now.

You know, were I some sort of smug jerk who insults people with backhanded comments I might insinuate that you were leaving the discussion because of the thorough trouncing you received by Reel On, Love. Then I would ask in a vague but still obviously directed fashion why you won't just admit your mistakes and accept that the Monk is inferior.

Were I arrogant in addition to that I would claim it were my arguments that drove you away.

However, I feel no pressing desire to claim every momentary silence while others live their lives outside this message board as a total victory over the lesser masses who just don't see my genius.

Oh by the way, when you were last crowing about your victory, I was playing D&D with some friends. Hot diggity Dog.

[Solo]

And where are your lower level sorcerer builds? But as I've already stated several times: wait for some days for the build.
Do not tell me what kind of posts to make now.

How Solo Makes A Low Level Sorcerer Build:

1. Do Organic Chemistry Homework
2. Finish a Calculus lab
3. Go to Ozymandias' spell list and pick out what is avaliable for a low level sorcerer.
4. Play Sorcerer.




Hmmm...look through this board. You will notice some builds of mine. Putting that into question here is quite bad style.

- Giacomo

No, I mean actual builds, on a charcter sheet, with skills, stats, attack bonus, damage, save DCs and all fully accounted for.


In core: get a mount. Or use the morhping cheese.

I didn't know your monk spends skill points in Ride (cross class) as well.

[Rutee]

Has he done that? In seriousness? I've always seen him say things like "My Monk has the following wands/scrolls" and whatnot, but never "This is a character sheet".

[Sir Giacomo]

Did you see the words 24/7? I can cast fly over Overland Flight. and have both if I need it. I can also cast Expeditious Retreat and get a 70ft-90ft fly speed.

Ah, so we are level 12 now (with the appropriate extend effect). OK.


And besides that there is Persistent Spell, Elemental Body and Polymorph any Object. Some of those may not be core, but I'm not obscenely wedded to Core like you, so I have no problem recognizing those options.

Polymorph any object? Don't let Reel on, Love hear you. He will give y ou a "thourough trouncing" :smallsmile:


You know, were I some sort of smug jerk who insults people with backhanded comments I might insinuate that you were leaving the discussion because of the thorough trouncing you received by Reel On, Love. Then I would ask in a vague but still obviously directed fashion why you won't just admit your mistakes and accept that the Monk is inferior.

Were I arrogant in addition to that I would claim it were my arguments that drove you away.


Well, I'm lucky that you are not a smug jerk, then. am I not?


However, I feel no pressing desire to claim every momentary silence while others live their lives outside this message board as a total victory over the lesser masses who just don't see my genius.

Oh by the way, when you were last crowing about your victory, I was playing D&D with some friends. Hot diggity Dog.

Crowing? Victory? Hmmm. And what did you play?

On your familiar idea: That's a good thing to prevent the monk surprising the wizard.
So now we have a 50:50 chance to win initiative. Monk wins? Charges, grapples or stuns. Wizard likely loses.
Wizard wins? Does (insert random spell of awesomeness, albeit mitigated at lower levels). Wizard likely wins.
So, in direct comparison all we have done is establish balance.

In terms of contribution for the group, the field is open for debate.

In the comparisons of the monk so far vs rogue, ranger, barbarian or fighter I did not see anything special.

Reel on Love trounced me soundly for my idea to take on CR 16 creatures by grappling, that's true. But the 7-10 attacks at that level plus stunned maneuver and quivering palm will likely get the monk to win vs those creatures.

But I hope my build will answer your questions better than this.

- Giacomo

[Solo]

:smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious:

DARN YOU PEOPLE! DARN YOU TO HECK!

How dare you get to emeraldstreak before I did?

Just because I have three back to back classes this morning does not give you the right leave me out!

*stabbity stab stab*

[Signmaker]

Quivering Palm works how often, again?

[Rutee]

Doesn't the monk have to actually hit to Grapple?

[Solo]

Doesn't the monk have to actually hit to Grapple?

A melee attack roll. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#attackRoll)

[The Rose Dragon]

I didn't know your monk spens skill points in Ride (cross class) as well.

Schrodinger's Monk: Until a character sheet is provided, he has simultaneously both maximum and no ranks in a skill (so he can do anything required without eating up the few skill points it has).

[Rutee]

A melee attack roll. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#attackRoll)

I need to use smilies more often. I was making a quip about the Monk's irritatingly low BAB for a front liner. In seriousness, /can/ it even reliably hit a Wizard? How far apart were they standing; You need to be within Movement range to make a Grapple attempt (You could Charge, but a Charge is an attack, period) , and if you were caught stealthing it's entirely likely that you were seen in advance of that 50 feet.

Edit: And of course, a scroll of Freedom of Movement, stilled, negates the whole problem anyway..

[Kurald Galain]

Schrodinger's Monk: Until a character sheet is provided, he has simultaneously both maximum and no ranks in a skill (so he can do anything required without eating up the few skill points it has).

No, no, everybody knows that the most important stats for a monk are intelligence (for the skill points) and charisma (for UMD and diplomacy). Things like strength or constitution really aren't important.

[Reel On, Love]

Ah, so we are level 12 now (with the appropriate extend effect). OK.
Rods of Extend Spell are not so expensive.



Polymorph any object? Don't let Reel on, Love hear you. He will give y ou a "thourough trouncing" :smallsmile:
He's right, CoV. There is no excuse for Polymorph Any Object. None.


So now we have a 50:50 chance to win initiative. Monk wins? Charges, grapples or stuns. Wizard likely loses.
Wizard wins? Does (insert random spell of awesomeness, albeit mitigated at lower levels). Wizard likely wins.
So, in direct comparison all we have done is establish balance.
We really haven't. To reach the flying wizard, the monk needs to chug a potion or speak a command word. He then needs to hit the wizard (without all your buffs, NOT as easy as you might think) and then needs to actually stun the wizard: Fort save for a level 12 wizard can be 4, +3 CON, +2 Rat, +3 cloak.... that makes +12, against the Monk's DC of 10+6+WIS--let's say 18 WIS with a +4 item, that's being very generous: the DC is 18. In other words, on a roll of 6+, the wizard makes the Stun save! 30% chance, not so "likely", now is it.

A level 10-12 grappled wizard can and will get out of a grapple (by 12, Contingency for this is availible... as are Dimension Door, Teleport, etc etc).


In terms of contribution for the group, the field is open for debate.
Oh, god, it's REALLY NOT. Wizards determine the outcome of fights. They Teleport the party around. They identify monster weaknesses. Let's go back to that first thing--the wizard's spells make otherwise impossible victories possible, make otherwise difficult victories smooth sailing, and make a lot of encounters just plain easy. (A bunch of beefy enemies! Confusion. Now, wait.)
Monks... grapple things, sometimes, maybe? Occasionally stun something, possibly? Run real fast?


In the comparisons of the monk so far vs rogue, ranger, barbarian or fighter I did not see anything special.
You're not looking. The Rogue is a skill and trapmonkey that's barely matched even across all splatbooks and not at all in core. The Barbarian is a solid front-line Melee Guy, doing more damage thank the monk more accurately and with less reliance on full attacks.
The Ranger... kinda sucks, but he does make a decent archer and has utility tracking.


Reel on Love trounced me soundly for my idea to take on CR 16 creatures by grappling, that's true. But the 7-10 attacks at that level plus stunned maneuver and quivering palm will likely get the monk to win vs those creatures.
You thought that grappling will likely get the monk to win, before. The Planetar is a melee opponent that also casts as a 17th level cleric. Again: Implosion, DC 25. With that 14 CON, your Fort save is, let's say you have a +4 cloak (being generous, again--you have a LOT of expenditures), +16. The Implosion DC is 25. That's a 40% chance to die right off the bat, on its first action.
Oh, your average HP? 107, with 14 CON. And as long as you have less than 150, it drops a Power Word: Stun on you--it's got 3 of them as SLAs.
Planetars: hardcore.

The other monsters are dragons (go ahead, trade full attacks, be my guest), the Horned Devil which is much more likely to stun YOU than you are to stun it, the greater stone golem which would probably smash you to bits, and the Nightwalker... which can summon Dread Wraiths, and move around while throwing SLAs out and waiting for one to land... oh, and it's no melee slouch.

You'll also get no points if beating these things assumes you get to buff for as long as you want, then sneak up on these things in the middle of an open field, get a surprise round, and full attack them, FYI.



Hmm - maybe the grappling specialist lord_khaine wishes to answer to this?

Grapple mods of +30 to +52 sound quite big. And without the core rules polymorph stuff the rules offer no big way to beat those critters at grappling.

Or is there?
+16 BAB, +15 STR from the Orc commoner example, +4 enlarge, +4 improved grapple...hmmm +39. Enough to compete, but not really win consistently.

OK, flurry it is.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo
The Orc example is a bad one, because the monk can't afford to sink everyting into strength.

I will also note that in order to compete, you need two rounds of buffing. In other words, the reason you're so reliant on these big buffs for these examples is because they really ARE necessary: without 2+ rounds of buffing, you can't even compete at the thing you're built for.



OK, because you make such a big issue of it and to keep it consistent (so far I basically advocated in this thread a more melee-combat-oriented monk)
STR 14, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 14, CHR 10

Is that better?

- Giacomo
Much better. I'm assuming you're human, so now you get to pick 3 skills (2 SP/level go into UMD). Hide, Move Silently, Spot? Tumble, Jump, Listen? Wow, it looks like you can't Hide/Move Silently, Jump and Tumble, Spot or Listen, and UMD on top of that.
It's almost like monks have--gosh--MAD. Now do you understand why MAD is a big deal?

BTW, *I* don't make such a big issue of it. D&D makes such a big issue of it. With a d8 and 10 CON, you are not a frontliner. You're a corpse. A monk with 10 CON at level 16 would have an average of 75 HP. A few attacks and he's dust.

[TempusCCK]

wasn't there a test to see how the monk held up in combat against a wizard a while back?

Because, seriously, I don't follow this stuff, but this seems trivial, if it's such a big deal, why don't you just make a character sheet, and have the fight on the forum here? I'm sure Emperor Tippy would be more than happy to provide a wizard for you to face.

[Sir Giacomo]

You thought that grappling will likely get the monk to win, before. The Planetar is a melee opponent that also casts as a 17th level cleric. Again: Implosion, DC 25. With that 14 CON, your Fort save is, let's say you have a +4 cloak (being generous, again--you have a LOT of expenditures), +16. The Implosion DC is 25. That's a 40% chance to die right off the bat, on its first action.


You see, it's stuff like that which - as Solo's subtly manipulating way of claiming a grapple needs a melee attack roll (it needs a melee TOUCH attack roll) which makes discussing with you guys so difficult. You either distort the rules, or quote stuff out of proportion and thus go to unfair lengths to show the monk sucks.

Reel On, Love. Guess what. The Planetar has only a +25 grapple modifier. And TOUCH AC of 13. So in this case, yes, a grapple will work if the freedom of movement is not up yet. And if it's not up yet, it's cast in combat, meaning the planetar has to endure the 370 damage with its 133 hp. (so enough leeway to ascertain that of the 7 attacks, 131 damage, including possible damage reduction, will be dealt). And btw, the Fort +14 does not look that impressive in doing two saves vs a DC 24 stunning fist at those levels, and DC 24 quivering palm followed up by it.

Furthermore, in the implosion effect you forgot the SR of the monk. So it's reduced to a, what 25% chance to die? Not too bad vs a same level creature meant to deplete near 100% of the resources of a character.
And also, care to tell me how other characters fare against a CR 16 creature with level 17 cleric spellcasting? (apparently now THAT is an obvious CR mistake of the designers).

- Giacomo

[Solo]

You see, it's stuff like that which - as Solo's subtly manipulating way of claiming a grapple needs a melee attack roll (it needs a melee TOUCH attack roll) which makes discussing with you guys so difficult.


http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple

To start a grapple, you need to grab and hold your target. Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll. If you get multiple attacks, you can attempt to start a grapple multiple times (at successively lower base attack bonuses).

Granted, upon further review, it says you need a melee touch attack to grab the target (Down at step two). However, I was rushed for time and decided to skim the intro.

I find it amusing that you think I'm subtly manipulating things against you. Surely you have a higher opinion of me than that?

Resorting to baseless accusations? For shame.:smalltongue:

You'll want to stop doing that. Other people might think you're getting desperate and losing. (We'll leave projection out of this)

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Ah, so we are level 12 now (with the appropriate extend effect). OK.

No, we are level 7 with a rod and 14 hours is more then enough time when obviously I am going to be resting for eight hours. However, at level 12 I can begin doing that sort of thing without using one of my spell slots for the day, that is true.


Polymorph any object? Don't let Reel on, Love hear you. He will give y ou a "thourough trouncing" :smallsmile:

Oh, I would never really use PoA, mostly because if I had a cleric cast it on me I could get a +16 racial bonus to Int and still only need it refreshed every 2 weeks. Oh yeah, and a +12 to Str, +6 to Dex, and +8 to Con.


Well, I'm lucky that you are not a smug jerk, then. am I not?

Indeed you are.


Crowing? Victory? Hmmm. And what did you play?

A level 2 Druid of course. Right now I'm in a bit of a snaffu, because I just joined the party after they "rescued" me (and then immediately started intimidating me in an attempt to force my compliance with their actions) and I am still dragging them by the feet to go rescue my animal companion. As such, I am only the best tank/melee damage in the party for 80 minutes a day. But once I get my companion back, I will be so permanently.


On your familiar idea: That's a good thing to prevent the monk surprising the wizard.

Actually, it's a good way of not being surprised by Rogues. I don't worry about 1d6+2 as much as I do 2d6+1. And you don't have the skill ranks for Sleight of Hand.


So now we have a 50:50 chance to win initiative. Monk wins? Charges, grapples or stuns. Wizard likely loses.
Wizard wins? Does (insert random spell of awesomeness, albeit mitigated at lower levels). Wizard likely wins.

No, what we have is, in certain very rare situations when a Monk can actually approach me hidden (remember those concealment/cover rules?) he must make 2 successful checks per round, and I have four attempts to beat those two checks at a level where the the d20 role is more important then ones modifiers. I think I'm going to borrow from Lord Khaine on this one, Multiple attempts with slightly less chance to succeed are worth more then one good one. Keep in mind that if even a single on of these four checks per round beats your two checks you won't be able to sneak up on me.

Of course if you are lucky enough to have favorable circumstances and better roles then me for all these things to go your way, then we will role Initiative, where I will have a slight bonus over you. (Mostly inconsequential.) At which point if you are within 30ft, and you won initiative you will be allowed to attempt a single attempt at grapple which you will have a 45% chance of hitting on, followed by making a grapple check you will have a 75% chance of winning. If I go first, I will move farther away, and then aim awesome spell X at you. (Or fire awesome spell X and then move, whatever.)

At higher levels this becomes even more moot (since I would never be alone) because I will be invisible and/or flying.

Also, please note that you do not have the skill points to put ranks in Spot, so my Hide check is just as likely to succeed against you as yours is against me.

Hide +2 Dex +4 Ranks vs Spot -1 Wis +2 Alertness +2 Elf +2 Ranks for 6vs5
Compared to:
Hide +3 Dex vs +2 Wis

Maybe you need to worry more about that Wizard sneaking up on you.


So, in direct comparison all we have done is establish balance.

First, Please determine the actual positions of your opponents before making such comments. Please point to even one example of me claiming that Monks are not balanced (other then my one Hypothetical).

Second, Yes we have established that Wizards are just as good at sneaking up on Monks as Monks are at sneaking up on Wizards, but since 1) The chance of either of these two being alone is minimal, 2) The ability to sneak up on someone is not the primary characteristic we are judging here, I think it is safe to say that the equal Wizard/Monk sneaking ability does not prove your point that Monks are balanced in Core.

Since the Wizard has a 12 out of 20 chance of incapacitating the Monk and he can do this over an area, (possibly catching the Monk's friends) while the Monk has only a 45% chance of hitting the Wizard's AC (something that doesn't even guarantee incapacitation) There are other factors in play.


In terms of contribution for the group, the field is open for debate.

Yes it is, I wish we would have debated about that by bringing in other party members and talking about realistic challenges instead of sneaking up on each other. But you brushed that aside.


In the comparisons of the monk so far vs rogue, ranger, barbarian or fighter I did not see anything special.

There has been no such comparison, all you did was list several random points that did not exist for real characters. That said I was not a part of those discussions for a reason, I did not have anything to say. I do have something to say about false attempts to portray Monk-Wizard collisions as sneaky monks with better Init jumping on and one shotting Wizards. When that is very far from the truth. In fact, almost the opposite.


Reel on Love trounced me soundly for my idea to take on CR 16 creatures by grappling, that's true. But the 7-10 attacks at that level plus stunned maneuver and quivering palm will likely get the monk to win vs those creatures.

So you are going to attempt to stun or death effect several large creatures with very good fort saves many of which are immune to one or both of those effects and most of which have ranged attack methods greater then yours as well as the capabilities to stay away from you?

Not my idea of a good time. I recommend sticking with the multiple damaging attacks system.

Though of course, some of those modifiers can actually be beaten by a well built Barbarian. and Non-Core by Barbarians with appropriate PrCs.

You see unlike a Monk, which is good at Grappling things that are bad at Grappling, a Grapple Focused Barbarian is average at grappling whatever he attempts to grapple. This means that in any fight, he can choose to Grapple one opponent, neutralizing it until after the other opponents are dealt with and allowing his party to easily defeat it. He doesn't do much damage on his own, but he does do a very good job of Lockdown.

That is why Grappling is a viable strategy at higher levels for a Barbarian who will still succeed, and not for a Monk who will fail more often or totally. It may not be the best strategy, but it is viable. He also has considerably more HP, making it not as terrible if he is picked upon by other foes he is not grappling.

Although ironically, for a Grapple character, Ring of Freedom of Movement is the best Item you can buy.

[Sir Giacomo]

Much better. I'm assuming you're human, so now you get to pick 3 skills (2 SP/level go into UMD). Hide, Move Silently, Spot? Tumble, Jump, Listen? Wow, it looks like you can't Hide/Move Silently, Jump and Tumble, Spot or Listen, and UMD on top of that.
It's almost like monks have--gosh--MAD. Now do you understand why MAD is a big deal?


I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

[Kurald Galain]

I agree fully. While I disagree with Giacomo on almost everything, he's been very polite the whole time. I respect that.


You see, it's stuff like that which - as Solo's subtly manipulating way of claiming

Now that's irony. I'm sure it was a very polite nasty insinuation?

[horseboy]

I agree fully. While I disagree with Giacomo on almost everything, he's been very polite the whole time. I respect that.It's part of why we keep coming back, even though we've seen the show. :smallwink:
No, like versus slashing, good, evil, silver, cold iron...

You know, the ones that are common.

Hell, even versus chaos and piercing.Well, versatile unarmed strike (PHBII) add slashing and piercing.

Now THAT is what I would consider a great idea. Often "anti-monkers" said they tried so hard and they failed. They should just post their sucky attempts here and the two of us will open a "monk build clinic".:smallcool: You take the outside core part, I'll take the core builds and repair them.Well, I've got that one from the Dragon (http://www.rpghq.org/profiler/view.php?id=115) slayer build test. It's VoP mainly because I hate dealing with all the finagling problems of WBL.

Personally, I'd vote it's a problem of the game itself. It's a game designed to take 4-7 people into a hole in the ground and kill things. Not all concepts that people want to roleplay can be expressed well under that concept, especially true "support" classes.

[The Rose Dragon]

Oooh! I know!

Only one skill point goes to UMD per level, you only get half a rank from every level. And seeing how you can't buy a full rank every level if you want to keep it maximized...

Still doesn't mean you can take that many skills, though.

[Signmaker]

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

Not much, compared to how much he just refuted your claims.

[Rutee]

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

It's 1 SP/Level for a half rank, rather then being allowed to keep your UMD ranks up with your level by double spending.

Though I think you /can/ do that with Adaptive Learning, which may have been assumed on RLO's part.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

So now you are going to assert that Reel On, Love is being disingenuous as well as Solo?

They both made quiet honest mistakes. You are the only one being disingenuous and glossing over everything that comes up.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Well, versatile unarmed strike (PHBII) add slashing and piercing.

It's too bad that Giamoco is contractually obligated to jump on you and verbally throttle you for suggesting that anything outside of the PHB is actually allowable in any game ever.

[Solo]

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

His last one?


Rods of Extend Spell are not so expensive.


Metamagic, Extend

The wielder can cast up to three spells per day that are extended as though using the Extend Spell feat.

Strong (no school); CL 17th; Craft Rod, Extend Spell; Price 3,000 gp (lesser), 11,000 gp (normal), 24,500 gp (greater).

So, for Overland Flight, you'd have to use a normal 11,000 rod. I don't know WBL, but I'm sure it costs less than what the monk is using :smallwink:


He's right, CoV. There is no excuse for Polymorph Any Object. None.

Yeah, that spell sucks. That's why I left it out of the Ozymandias build.


We really haven't. To reach the flying wizard, the monk needs to chug a potion or speak a command word.

Seems to be correct, unless your monk can fly somehow without aid.


He then needs to hit the wizard (without all your buffs, NOT as easy as you might think)

It's called Greater Invisibility.



and then needs to actually stun the wizard: Fort save for a level 12 wizard can be 4, +3 CON, +2 Rat, +3 cloak.... that makes +12, against the Monk's DC of 10+6+WIS--let's say 18 WIS with a +4 item, that's being very generous: the DC is 18. In other words, on a roll of 6+, the wizard makes the Stun save! 30% chance, not so "likely", now is it.

A level 12 wizard throws around a 6 level spell with a DC 21 save at least, assuming 20 Int, without things like Spell Focus, for comparison.

A level 3 spell has a DC 18 save.

So the monk, assuming the DC is calculated correctly, hits the wizard with the equivilant of a 3rd level save or sucks spell.... although it only lasts for what, one round?

With regards to the stunning fist DC at level 12, wouldn't a monk have a DC of 20 with 6 from his class levels, and 4 from his 18 Wis score?

So it'd have the save of a 5th fort based Save or X spell.... that stuns for one round?



A level 10-12 grappled wizard can and will get out of a grapple (by 12, Contingency for this is availible... as are Dimension Door, Teleport, etc etc).

This seems to be correct.



Oh, god, it's REALLY NOT. Wizards determine the outcome of fights. They Teleport the party around. They identify monster weaknesses. Let's go back to that first thing--the wizard's spells make otherwise impossible victories possible, make otherwise difficult victories smooth sailing, and make a lot of encounters just plain easy. (A bunch of beefy enemies! Confusion. Now, wait.)
Monks... grapple things, sometimes, maybe? Occasionally stun something, possibly? Run real fast?

Wizards alter the laws of reality. Monks beat things up.

One of these roles is easier to make up for than the other.


You're not looking. The Rogue is a skill and trapmonkey that's barely matched even across all splatbooks and not at all in core. The Barbarian is a solid front-line Melee Guy, doing more damage thank the monk more accurately and with less reliance on full attacks.
The Ranger... kinda sucks, but he does make a decent archer and has utility tracking.

I think Rogues are good at skillmonkying. They don't seem to get much competition.

I like Barbarians. They're fun, and I've done well with them in combat.

Rangers... are good as long as the enemy doesn't foil your archery with Wind Wall or anything.


Planetars: hardcore.

Wouldn't know. Never heard of it before. Should I have?

Although he does seem to have forgottent eh Monk's SR.


I will also note that in order to compete, you need two rounds of buffing. In other words, the reason you're so reliant on these big buffs for these examples is because they really ARE necessary: without 2+ rounds of buffing, you can't even compete at the thing you're built for.

Well, you do talk a lot about how great your monk is... after he buffs himself, don't you, SG?


Oooh! I know!

Only one skill point goes to UMD per level, you only get half a rank from every level. And seeing how you can't buy a full rank every level if you want to keep it maximized...

Still doesn't mean you can take that many skills, though.

I'm sure I missed where this happened, but since two people have commented on it, he probably also made a mistake somewhere in his skill point assignments. The monk skills he proposed should probably be a bit higher, or more diverse.


Now, SG, I have a favor to ask of you. To convince me of your fairness, please tell me whats wrong with your posts?

[Frosty]

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

What is wrong with Reel On, Love's post? I see it. He forgot the fact that Monks get 4+int per level, instead of 2+int per level. Probably by accident.

[Reel On, Love]

It's 1 SP/Level for a half rank, rather then being allowed to keep your UMD ranks up with your level by double spending.

Though I think you /can/ do that with Adaptive Learning, which may have been assumed on RLO's part.

Yeah, I'm just so used to only taking cross-class skills when they were a class skill previously I think of it as 2 SP/level. So the monk gets half ranks for 1 SP/level. Okay, he can Hide, MS, Spot, and Listen. Where's the Jump and Tumble? Where's the Diplomacy? The Sense Motive? All these things monks are supposedly good at, until it turns out you can't afford the INT because you need your other stats to be good, too.


As for the planetar--yes, I forgot SR Still a 25% chance of dying outright on sight. No, grappling the planetar isn't wise, as a spellcaster with SLAs it can get out easily, or just, say, use Power Word Stun a couple of times. It has DR and regeneration; it can survive a couple rounds of grappling and it can Heal itself afterwards. (And it probably Greater Dispels the monk on sight. Stripping Divine Power and Enlarge Person alone drops the monk 12 points of grapple!)

Dispel/Stun/buff/melee is probably what the planetar would do (they like fighting), although it wouldn't stick around in a grapple it can't really win. An optimal planetar would have an optimal (and devastating) spell selection.

I freely admit that the Planetar is a tough nut for all non-casters, though, not just the monk. The wizard can do his typical one-shot thing, a Blasphemy or Word of Chaos messes the Planetar up, &etc, but melee types have a tough time... because the Planetar is a spellcaster.

And yes, the planetar is under-CRed. It has the same CR as a human Cleric 16--or even a human Fighter 16!

[Solo]

Also, SG, when you get around to it...

You seem to think we're ignoring the flaws of people on our side. I'll admit that this is a possibility.

Of course, you also failed to chastise/restrain/criticize emerald a few pages back while he was being rude to everyone...

Unless I missed it?


If I misinterpreted what you are saying, then ignore this post.

[The Rose Dragon]

What is wrong with Reel On, Love's post? I see it. He forgot the fact that Monks get 4+int per level, instead of 2+int per level. Probably by accident.

Wow. Yes.

Did they get 4 + Int modifier in 3rd Edition, too? Cause my mind often still goes back to that. I still think Rangers having 4 + Int modifier skill points per level before I slap myself across the face.

[Rutee]

Er.. how did he mess that up? "-2 SP per UMD rank, So you get 3 for skills, for a Human with 10 int". Pretty sure that's 4 + Int.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Er.. how did he mess that up? "-2 SP per UMD rank, So you get 3 for skills, for a Human with 10 int". Pretty sure that's 4 + Int.

He messed up because in Core, there is no way to spend two points on UMD per level without a level dip.

[Rutee]

Yeah, I covered that already. I meant the "He was figuring 2 + Int Skill Points per level" accusation. The posted Giacomonk had 10 Int, if I'm not misremembering, so 5 SP per level is accurate; The part he messed up on was, yes, the caps, not the SP/level.

The OP didn't just mean mechanical goodness, did it? 'cause on a conceptual level, a Monk can fill a similar role to a Paladin, without screwing with Party Dynamics ("Don't turn me Chaotic" is a much nicer requisite then "Follow my code of honor"), so that's something. Plus they're a theoretical step towards the default DnD assumption being a fantasy grab bag (Though 4e is pulling it back towards traditional medieval ness.)

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Yeah, I covered that already. I meant the "He was figuring 2 + Int Skill Points per level" accusation. The posted Giacomonk had 10 Int, if I'm not misremembering, so 5 SP per level is accurate.

But that wasn't Gia's accusation that was what other people mistook the problem to be.

However it's all a moot point, ROL was just thinking of a build that is better then Gias, even reverting back to Gia's he still has the same problem, just now he has no feats either.

[Rutee]

What exactly was the problem supposed to be according to Giacomo then? I know he didn't mean the "One rank of UMD/level" since he needs that.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

What exactly was the problem supposed to be according to Giacomo then? I know he didn't mean the "One rank of UMD/level" since he needs that.

RoL wrote that Gia would be spending 2 points on UMD per level, leaving him 3 ranks left, when in fact he can't do that, so he would be putting 1 point in UMD each level, leaving him 4 points left to spend.

Though in this case, I think Solo is right, what business does Giamoco have in insisting we pounce on our side to when he never even bothered to deal with Ravenous hatred radiating from Emerald whatever.

[Rutee]

We have no innate responsibility to Giacomo to hound people on our 'side'. That needlessly creates and enforces an arbitrary division, polarizing things into an us/them discussion, and that just gets in the way of a reasonable discussion.

I support correcting a mistake made by one's idealogues because a mistake was made, and mistakes should be corrected. Period.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

I support correcting a mistake made by one's idealogues because a mistake was made, and mistakes should be corrected. Period.

I believe that is precisely Gia's point, he was insinuating that if we did not correct the mistake that we were clearly ignoring it because we are biased and/or manipulative.

I personally don't consider myself on a side in anything. But I do know that Solo is awesome, Giamoco is insufferable, and Monks can jump Wizards from Hiding and one shot them.

[Rutee]

Couldn't a Rogue handle OHKOing a Wizard better? They have Armor proficiency, so they don't have to spend a feat to get some Silent Move/Shadow. They have 2 less attacks, but by level 20, about 23 more damage per hit, on average.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Couldn't a Rogue handle OHKOing a Wizard better? They have Armor proficiency, so they don't have to spend a feat to get some Silent Move/Shadow. They have 2 less attacks, but by level 20, about 23 more damage per hit, on average.

Monks don't have to spend a feat to get MS/Hide (though it makes up about half their skill points to pump those two) I assume that's what you mean.

And Rogues would do better at lower levels, but after about level 10 All Wizards are immune to crits and by extension SA.

Of course, Rogues still gank Wizards better then Monks because they have UMD as a class skill, and they have more skill points, and they have Slight of Hand and Spot, both needed to strip the Wizard of all his components before sneaking away. Wizards can deal, even with this, but it's harder then dealing with a Monk. Or a Rogue that just straight up attacks you.

[Kurald Galain]

Couldn't a Rogue handle OHKOing a Wizard better?
Conceivably, yes. An optimized sneak attacker is a scary sight. They also trump the monk at the UMD game :smallsmile:

There are plenty of things immune to sneak attack, of course (e.g. becoming undead), as well as means for the wizard to obtain those; but there are also feats, abilities and items that let rogues bypass most of those immunities (e.g. gravestrike).

[Rutee]

Monks don't have to spend a feat to get MS/Hide (though it makes up about half their skill points to pump those two) I assume that's what you mean.

And Rogues would do better at lower levels, but after about level 10 All Wizards are immune to crits and by extension SA.

Of course, Rogues still gank Wizards better then Monks because they have UMD as a class skill, and they have more skill points, and they have Slight of Hand and Spot, both needed to strip the Wizard of all his components before sneaking away. Wizards can deal, even with this, but it's harder then dealing with a Monk. Or a Rogue that just straight up attacks you.
I meant Silent Move/Shadow Enhancements on Armor, which are +10 competence bonuses to each, IIRC.

[Da Beast]

A monk balance thread? Has it been a week already?

I read the first few pages before getting sick and jumping to the end. I saw plenty of statements in the first few pages that were just plain wrong, but I'll assume that they've been addressed and just say this: Stop with the Schrodinger's Mage comments until you stop arguing from the perspective of Shcrodinger's Monk. In this thread we have monks who have reduced their MAD by taking weapon finesse yet can some how still deal decent damage and be competent grapplers. At the same time their good scouts (minimum of 4 skill points per level) while good at diplomacy because they're humans for the extra skill points. But then monks have UMD to make up for their bass attack bonus so they also put a decent score into intelligence. Except now the monk is an elf so he'll have proficiency with ranged weapons. So that's a better score into intelligence. But now the monk is pumping all his saves while front lining and being a scout and grappling and doing social interactions and being a human and being an elf (but not a half elf) so he needs constitution for hit points and fortitude saves. So that's good strength for damage and grappling; good dexterity for reflex saves, AC, and attack roles good constitution for fortitude saves and hit points; good intelligence for skill points (being a human helps, except that he's also an elf and needs more skills than his class and race give him to begin with); good wisdom for will saves and all those monk abilities; and charisma can't really be dumped either because on top of everything else he's also good at social interactions. And he's two races. And built to be good at tripping, disarming, and grappling, yet not reliant on strength somehow.

To sum all that up, stop accusing very basic mage tactics (OMG, what wizard prepares dimension door in case of grapples? THAT'S UNREALISTIC!!! ESSAY RESISTANCE? NO MAGE IS PREPARED FOR EVERYTHING!!! (no, this aren't specifically from this thread, just general examples of the sort of stuff I see)) of being shcrodinger's mage while parading around some sort of super monk with the feats and stat placement to do everything (and still not all that well).

[Bassetking]

Also, though I commend your always civil tone, you really come off as rather smug very often. Please, don't let this thread devolve into the mess all the others have turned into and actually post a fully statted out Monk build that does all those things you claim it can do.




Well, that advice I shall heed.

- Giacomo

Heya, Freelance! Since there hasn't yet been a build forthcoming from Gia, here's one of the ones he's created, that was made under the auspices and titles of "Most Monkishly monk" he could design.

Without further ado, concrete math that Gia has committed to, on this forum.



Elektra Assassin

11th Level (28-point-buy) Human Monk, Lawful Evil.
STR 12 (4 point buy), DEX 12 (4), CON 14 (4, +2 belt), INT 12 (4), WIS 18 (6, 2 stat raises, +2 item), CHR 14 (6)
FEATS: Improved Initiative (Human Bonus), Improved Unarmed Strike (Monk bonus), Improved Grapple (1st level), Stunning Fist (Monk bonus, DC 19), Combat Reflexes (Monk bonus), Blind-Fight (3rd), Magical Apitude (6th), Improved Trip (Monk bonus), Skill Focus-UMD (9th).
SPECIAL/CLASS ABILITIES: Improved Evasion, Immunity to non-magic disease, Slow fall (50ft), Immunity to Poison, Wholeness of Body (heal up to 22 hp over course of the day as standard action without AoO)
SKILLS (84 points total): Listen +18 (14 ranks, WIS), Spot +6 (2 ranks, WIS), tumble +18 (14 ranks, DEX, +2 jump synergy), spellcraft +12 (7 ranks/14 cross-class, +2 magical apitude, +2 knowledge arcane synergy, INT), hide +1 (DEX), move silently +20 (14 ranks, DEX, +5 boots), Healing +5 (WIS, healing kit), jump +20 (5 ranks, STR, +2 tumble synergy, +12 due to move), knowledge-arcane +6 (5 ranks, INT). UMD +19 (7 ranks/14 cross-class, +2 spellcraft synergy, +3 circlet, +2 magical apitude, +3 skill focus, CHR), diplomacy +4 (1 rank, CHR, circlet, -2 vs non-dwarves/gnomes/halflings, but a total +6 vs Dwarves), Perform-Wind Instruments +9 (1 rank, CHR, circlet, pipes of sounding considered masterwork item+2).
HIT POINTS: 75 (max at 1st level, avg for lvls 2-11, CON+22) + false life spell effect (1d10+3. 9 vs Reel, 11 vs basset). 84/86.
AC: 21 (WIS, DEX, mage armour, monk+2 AC); 24 (when fighting defensively). Flat-footed 20. Flat-footed touch 16.
INITIATIVE: +5 (feat, DEX)
SAVES (vs spells&spell effects/vs other): Fort +11/+9, Refl +10/+8, Will +13/+11 (+15/+13 vs enchantment)
MOVE: 60ft (30ft base, 30ft monk enhance, 45ft without sight)
ATTACKS: Grapple +13; flurry (with +1 greater magic fang) +10/+10/+10/+5 (Dmg 1d10+2, ki-magic/lawful), (Masterwork) Shuriken +10/+10/+10/+5 (Dmg 1d2+1)
EQUIPMENT (gold/weight in pounds):
21,000/- Wand of Polymorph
14,900/1 Belt of Dwarvenkind
5,400/1 Eversmoking bottle (chained tightly to belt with steel chain 1 gp 1/10 price of normal chain to dwarven belt)
4,500/- Wand of Mirror Image (4,500) for 1d4+1 images.
4,500/- Circlet of Persuasion
4,000/- Periapt of WIS +2
2,500/1 Elven boots
310/5 50 Shuriken, Masterwork, 40 on a belt hung left to right (10 in hair and clothes)
410/5 50 Shuriken, Masterwork – Silver, 40 on a belt hung right to left (10 in hair and clothes)
1/5 Traveller’s Outfit
2/- 1 gp Silver and Steel rings on each hand
2,000/5 Handy Haversack

All following items stored in Haversack
1,800/3 Pipes of Sounding
750/- Wand of Cure Light Wounds
500/1 Potion of Hide from Animals
90/3 3 Thunderstones
50/1 Healer’s Kit
20/40 Caltrops for 20 5ft squares
Belt Pouches
37/6 Light Crossbow and quiver with 20 Bolts
4/4 2 Kamas
-/4 Quarterstaff

Buff spells active prior to combat:
1,500 for greater magic fang +1 for 5 hours effect (cast by 5th level druid npc prior to combat; 5th lvl x 30 x 10)
600 False Life spell (cast by 3rd level wizard npc prior to combat, 3rd lvl x 20 x10)
200 Mage Armour (cast by 2nd level wizard npc prior to combat, 2nd lvl x 10 x 10)

65,972/23 TOTAL
________________


So, until we get a different response from Gia, and in spirit of this post from page Fifteen.




Hmmm...look through this board. You will notice some builds of mine.
- Giacomo

We can use this as a base-line for comparison, and to...

Collapse the Schroedinger Monk's Waveform.


Riiiiight. I'm sure emeraldstreak is a VASTLY better character builder and has a MUCH finer understanding of how D&D works and how to make strong characters than those of us who hang out at the CO boards.

Eyeroll.

Right. It's not like any of us have builds on the WOTC Theoretical Optimization "Campaign Smashers" List....oh... oh, wait...

[Talic]

So, at level 11, it's swinging a +13 to grapple,and a +10 range? if it holds it's ground? With ranged weapons that are incredibly short ranged? This thing wouldn't be able to take the average CR 8 beefy critter, much less contribute at CR 9-11.

Also 21 AC, and 75 hp. This guy'd go down in 2 rounds to the average stone giant, 3 to a couple brown bears.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

+13 to grapple? BWA HA HA. Dire tiger. CR 8. +24, including a Pounce and 2 Rakes, not to mention Improved Grab. And that's just the first core CR 8 I could find. Nice.

Edit, someone post how that monk would do, fully buffed, against a Dire Tiger, which seems to exceed it in every way. (More HP, better AB, more HP, an AC of only 4 less, and better base damage.) I want to see this.

[horseboy]

Also 21 AC, and 75 hp. This guy'd go down in 2 rounds to the average stone giant, 3 to a couple brown bears.His arguments: Bears wouldn't be able to find him thanks to his potion, the giants, he pops the bottle and blinds everybody, keeping them from hitting him.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

His arguments: Bears wouldn't be able to find him thanks to his potion, the giants, he pops the bottle and blinds everybody, keeping them from hitting him.The potion that is ruined if he attacks, right? The one that takes a standard action to consume? How is that a strategy?

And blinding your party is a surefire way to get left behind at the next tavern.

[Rutee]

Don't turn all squishy! 6 even level Magic Missiles, on average, and that's just a first level spell.

How's he going to fly? Polymorph, right? He spent.. wow. That's a big portion of WBL on a consumable (And I believe the DMG recommends not allowing a large portion of WBL on /any/ single item.)

Dig the Cha. higher then Dex. too.

Also, those are the costs for single spells, right?

[Nebo_]

Giacomo, you have failed.

[horseboy]

The potion that is ruined if he attacks, right? The one that takes a standard action to consume? How is that a strategy?

And blinding your party is a surefire way to get left behind at the next tavern.Those were amongst many of our original points.

[Rutee]

Oh wow. Greater Invis is 4th level? Mr. Monk may have problems without See Invis (Or did I miss that up there?)

[Skjaldbakka]

Yep. A spell considered broken (and necessitating a by +17 higher UMD check) is all that is left in your arsenal to defend your position. You're getting desperate.

This thread is moving really fast, so perhaps this has been brought up already. Giacomo, Mr. Champion of Core is Balanced Perfectly, you can't argue that a spell is considered broken, and is therefore not a valid argument against your UMD monk. To do so undermines your position that Core is Balanced. Appealing to what others consider to be broken to support your argument, when you in fact do not consider it to broken yourself works more against you than any point you may be trying to make with that position.

More when I catch up from last night.


It is quite rare, though, I daresay that the monk will not get his wand buffs off at lower levels.

Really? At low level, most things go down in one shot. Including PCs. Of course, lower levels is relative, I suppose. 1-5, that is more true than 6-10.

As to out-of-combat buffs, your most important buff is Divine Power. Duration? Rounds.

*all quotes so far from Sir Giacomo*


by EmeraldStreak
And a good fighter will need str, dex, con, and int. Rangers aren't much better. Don't get me started on Paladins.

A good fighter needs Strength and Con. The rapier fighter does better as a rogue. With full plate, the most dex you can use is a 12, 13 if you really want the dodge tree. Fighters don't need int unless they want Expertise, and then only a 13.

Rangers get 6 skills/level. They are expected to have Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen, and Survival. That leaves plenty of wiggle room w/o a good intelligence. A ranger wants a 14 wisdom eventually, to get his spells, so Wis takes the place of Int as a priority. 2WF sucks (for the same reasons flurry does, btw), so a ranger doesn't need an awesome strength or con, as archery is the better thing to focus on. Of course my typical ranger goes archery style, and takes Quickdraw and Power Attack, and can mix up ranged and melee combat pretty well.

Compare to the monk. Monk (contrary to popular belief) is not as MAD as people think. In Core, he needs Strength and Wisdom, and some Dexterity to boost his AC. The level 20 fighter is going to have +5 full plate and +5 shield, and some other AC buffs the monk can also buy. That is 20 points. The monk has 4 from class, and can get 2 shield from a ring and 8 armor from bracers, putting him at 14. He needs to get 6 more between his wisdom and his dexterity to match. A grappling monk is going to likely hose his dex, as he won't be getting it anyway in a grapple, and thus has a priority of Strength (as high as possible), Wisdom (+6 by level 20 is ideal), and Con (+1 mod higher than the fighter's to match HP with him).

As much as I think monk needs some help, it isn't as MAD as people think. If you bring in Intuitive Attack, here is another build:

Everything into Wisdom. Pimp out your stunning fist DC. Take feats to give you other things to do with Stunning Fist uses (like freeze the lifeblood). Take Rapid Stunning.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Please don't drag that build into this discussion, he was almost playing an actual Monk, with Cha as a dump stat, no Polymorph and only about 30 wands. I want him to finish his new build, the one that only "needs" Divine Power once a day (every day, for 8 levels before 16, adding up to quite a sum of money) so that we could then compare him in both a buffed and unbuffed state against appropriate CR.

[Reel On, Love]

So, at level 11, it's swinging a +13 to grapple,and a +10 range? if it holds it's ground? With ranged weapons that are incredibly short ranged? This thing wouldn't be able to take the average CR 8 beefy critter, much less contribute at CR 9-11.

Also 21 AC, and 75 hp. This guy'd go down in 2 rounds to the average stone giant, 3 to a couple brown bears.

Apparently, he planned to rely exclusively on Polymorph in combat.

[Skjaldbakka]

EmeraldStreak
On the contrary, those two [flurry and high movement rate] are highly synergetic after some tweaking (not that you would know what to tweak)

Moving and Full Attacking are mutually exclusive, except for Druids, in core. At least I think Druids can get pounce in core, I'm not 100% on that.

Outside of Core, not even Giacomo can make a monk outpace the barbarian's potential for damage, which can readily approach 4 figures on a charge. Freaking Shock Trooper/Frenzied Berserker/Leap Attack. I'm not a fan of that build, can you tell? The only way to give a monk pounce opens the door to the barbarian having pounce, and to sourcebooks with extreme power attack abuse. Which does not help the monk's case.


Meh, Giacomo, you doth mock too much. Also, on the subject of 'xy rules companion', I was looking at my 'Magic of Incarnum' copy, and I'm sure that there is some nifty stuff in there that could, in a non-borked way, help your monk, without recourse to spells or items. Airstep sandals, for example, could take care of your flying needs, whereas there's a ton of grappling aids.

Actually a Skarn monk can wear armor and retain his wisdom to AC, altough he loses his class bonus progression to AC in exchange for it. There is also a soulmeld that gives good bonus damage to unarmed strikes, as well as bonuses to several strength based checks. I don't remember offhand which opposed checks it works on, I think just trip, bull rush, and sunder, but i'm not sure.

[Talic]

His arguments: Bears wouldn't be able to find him thanks to his potion, the giants, he pops the bottle and blinds everybody, keeping them from hitting him.

Forgetting that stone giants have a good hide modifier in the environment they're found, and, with a 180 ft range increment, will more often than not be getting the first hit from 300-400 feet away. Stone giants are built to be distance ambushers, unlike the other giants, which are more straightforward. Granted, this monk could close that distance in 2 rounds or so, so a typical combat could look something like this:

Surprise round: Giant throws a rock at the flatfooted figures moving through the pass. Distance - 400 feet. 3rd range increment, +9 mod (+2 from hiding), against AC 20. 50/50 shot, for an average damage (miss chance calculated, 2.5% crit chance not calculated) of 10.5.

Monk wins initiative, and full runs forward towards the giant, closing 240 feet. Giant attacks again, from closer this time, with a +11 to hit, vs AC 20. 60% hit chance, damage (again, 3% crit not factored in, weighted for odds of miss) is 12.6.

Monk closes 60 feet, getting to 100 feet out, and draws his wand of polymorph. Giant throws again, average damage: 11.55.

Monk polymorphs to tiger, for the pounce and improved grab, and size increase. Moves 40 feet forward, keeping out of giant's melee range. Monk heals 11 hp from poly this round. Giant throws, +11 to hit, vs AC 24 (-1 size, +1 more dex, +3 nat armor), 40% hit chance, 8.4 damage. Draws club.

Monk's about 32 hp down, in alternate form, and in charge position, not bad.

Monk readies action to move if attacked, and moves 15 feet forward. Giant charges, power attacking for 5, and monk sidesteps the charge, tumbling, ending 20 feet from giant's ending location.

Monk then charges, realizing that stunning DC of 19 isn't that great against this thing's +13 fort. Stone giant makes an AoO, +12 vs AC 22. 55% hit chance, average damage, 17.05. Monk attacks, full attack, +12/+12/+7/+12/+12, vs AC 23. Average damage, 20.5. Grapple check, +18, vs giant's +22. Giant wins this time.

Giant uses full attack, no power attack this time, realizing that his foe has a bit of defense. +17/+12 vs AC 22. 80% hit chance and 55% hit chance, average damage for both, Average damage 28.35.

Monk is down 77 or so hp, on average. Assuming false life up, monk is still alive, tumbles 40 feet out, readies action to move if giant enters melee range. Giant tries, monk evades. Next round, monk full runs away, and plots to sneak back later and try to ambush the giant (with a much better chance of success, provided he's patient enough to wait 'til the giant's not near his club).

[Skjaldbakka]

Who ever said I NEED it four times/day?

Core balance assumes that there are 4 meaningful encounters a day. Assuming a 4 man party, unless the monk solos one of those encounters, he would be expected to contribute meaningfully in all 4 of those encounters.

In one of my games, expecting only 4 encounters/day is a mistake, unless the party is very unoptimized, as I plan my games to challenge the party. Which makes monk a very poor choice in my games, as the monk can't handle what an optimized team of fighter/rogue/wizard/cleric can. I suppose we could mix it up and run monk/druid/ranger/sorceror. If the monk only uses his buffs for one combat a day, he isn't helping much, and is certainly not contributing equally with the druid's animal comanion (a likelier candidate for the druid's long term buff spells).

An unoptimized monk dies much more readily than an unoptimized wizard. You don't have to look much farther than the stats for Mialee and Ember to figure that one out.

EDIt- recently reminded of the importance of the Sun School feat for monks. That way they can reliably get up to a wizard and stun, in the same action, 1/day.

. . . and now I am fully caught up. I agree that one should try to argue the other side in a heated debate like this one, as it can only strengthen your position if you are right, or convince you that you are wrong if you are wrong. So I am going to make the best monk I can tonight, using only core, and then one using Intuitive Attack (which is not core) but is otherwise core.

The first will be a grappler, compared to a barbarian of the same level that grapples. The second will be a stunning fist focused character, and will assume the rogue kills it if he stuns it. Actually, the rogue kills it either way, I suppose, as grappled and stunned both deny dex, but I'll try for high damage also, what with the high strength on monk #1.

Then perhaps Giacomo can advice me how to make those monks better.

If I have time, I'll post a monk that uses my suggested houserules for monk as well, and compare it to a psychic rogue that I actually play in a PbP game.

[emeraldstreak]

Freaking Shock Trooper/Frenzied Berserker/Leap Attack.

So you're saying a straight barbarian cannot compete with monk for damage?

[MeklorIlavator]

So you're saying a straight barbarian cannot compete with monk for damage?

Uhhh, considering his post consists of hims saying that the barbarian is better, no I don't think he is saying that. More the opposite.

Note the bolded sections of this quote:


Outside of Core, not even Giacomo can make a monk outpace the barbarian's potential for damage, which can readily approach 4 figures on a charge. Freaking Shock Trooper/Frenzied Berserker/Leap Attack.

[Talic]

So you're saying a straight barbarian cannot compete with monk for damage?

Even a straight barb vs straight monk, barb has more options.

However, outside of core, the barbarian has better PrC's designed for it as well.

Only a couple non-caster classes really outshine them. Hulking hurler, and ToB, to my knowledge.

[MeklorIlavator]

Even a straight barb vs straight monk, barb has more options.

However, outside of core, the barbarian has better PrC's designed for it as well.

Only a couple non-caster classes really outshine them. Hulking hurler, and ToB, to my knowledge.
Actually, a barbarian out damages the ToB in a full attack/charge situation. The reason ToB is considered better is that they have more options.

Also, the ubercharger builds can generally get damage in the thousands.

[Nebo_]

So you're saying a straight barbarian cannot compete with monk for damage?

When you deliberately misinterpret someones post like that and act smug about it, you fail.

[Skjaldbakka]

So you're saying a straight barbarian cannot compete with monk for damage?

No. I am saying (again, since you failed to comprehend initially), that your claim that a monk's fast movement synergizes with his flurry of blows class feature is true only when he has pounce. Since you have to go outside core to get a monk with pounce, you have to compare him to the primary non-core pounce build, which has no rival in terms of damage dealing capacity (with melee attacks, anyway).

The monk gains little power from supplements.

[Talic]

Actually, a barbarian out damages the ToB in a full attack/charge situation. The reason ToB is considered better is that they have more options.

Also, the ubercharger builds can generally get damage in the thousands.

ToB with imbued healing can get infinite damage on a standard attack. 2 level cleric, 9 level warblade, 2 level bloodstorm blade, choose a 1d2 ranged weapon, treat it as a melee with bloodstorm blade, and imbue heal to make all your 1's be treated as 2's when rolling damage. With aura of chaos.

1's are treated as 2's. If it's a 2, roll again, and add to total. if that's a 1, it's treated as a 2. So on, so forth.

ToB is more breakable than ubercharger.

See? earlier posts were "optimize". This is "munchkinry". Note the difference.

[emeraldstreak]

No. I am saying (again, since you failed to comprehend initially), that your claim that a monk's fast movement synergizes with his flurry of blows class feature is true only when he has pounce.


Wrong.



The monk gains little power from supplements.

Wrong.

[Rutee]

This I want to hear. More the former then the latter; How does Flurry synergize with high movement? They're mutually exclusive bonuses. That is, in fact, the opposite of Synergy.

[Nebo_]

Wrong.

Well... ? I'm waiting for you to prove that or back it up.

[tyckspoon]

ToB with imbued healing can get infinite damage on a standard attack. 2 level cleric, 9 level warblade, 2 level bloodstorm blade, choose a 1d2 ranged weapon, treat it as a melee with bloodstorm blade, and imbue heal to make all your 1's be treated as 2's when rolling damage. With aura of chaos.

1's are treated as 2's. If it's a 2, roll again, and add to total. if that's a 1, it's treated as a 2. So on, so forth.


It's done with a Crusader, unless Bloodstorm Blade has access to Devoted Spirit?

[MeklorIlavator]

ToB with imbued healing can get infinite damage on a standard attack. 2 level cleric, 9 level warblade, 2 level bloodstorm blade, choose a 1d2 ranged weapon, treat it as a melee with bloodstorm blade, and imbue heal to make all your 1's be treated as 2's when rolling damage. With aura of chaos.

1's are treated as 2's. If it's a 2, roll again, and add to total. if that's a 1, it's treated as a 2. So on, so forth.

ToB is more breakable than ubercharger.

See? earlier posts were "optimize". This is "munchkinry". Note the difference.
Note how many other ToB entries are in the Campaign Smashers Thread. Note that even then, this requires use of cleric spells. Note that the ubercharger has two entries. Note how many creatures have 1000 HP(correct answer for the MM1=0). Note Hulking Hurler. If you only need to to X damage to be able to kill anything in the game, does it really matte if you do x+infinity, or only x+~1000? Aren't both equally bad?

Also, your above build doesn't work, because it relies on a crusader stance(last time I checked). Of course, you could use martial study/stance to get it, but as the stance has a couple prerequisites, its a bit more difficult.

Now, not counting the 1 broken method in the ToB, a Barbarian does more Damage on average than a ToBer.


Edit:emeraldstreak, why don't you show why that's wrong. Unless, of course, you don't really have a reason at all, you just happen to like who the word "wrong" looks.

[emeraldstreak]

This I want to hear. More the former then the latter; How does Flurry synergize with high movement? They're mutually exclusive bonuses. That is, in fact, the opposite of Synergy.

Yes, it's counterintuitive, but it can be done. More on that when I get to post a monk build or two (presumably when the gauntlet is set).

[Talic]

Note how many other ToB entries are in the Campaign Smashers Thread. Note that even then, this requires use of cleric spells. Note that the ubercharger has two entries. Note how many creatures have 1000 HP(correct answer for the MM1=0). Note Hulking Hurler. If you only need to to X damage to be able to kill anything in the game, does it really matte if you do x+infinity, or only x+~1000? Aren't both equally bad?

When one build does it at a range of 10 feet on a charge, and the other does it at a range of 250' on a standard action, or to 4 diff opponents within that range on a full, then the one is better.

Oh, as for the crusader thing, would it work, if warblade levels were replaced with crusader? then is it still possible? Then why are you being anal about it?

As for the cleric spells? Go bard for a level or two, get cure moderate that way. It's not the spell that does the ability, it's a conjuration(healing) spell. Any class that gets them is available for it.

[Skjaldbakka]

Yes, it's counterintuitive, but it can be done.

Wrong.


....

Oh, wait, I mistook myself for you for a moment there. You seem to assume that we aren't familiar with the game mechanics. You can say anything you want, but it won't change the fact that monk has no way to both move and make a full attack in the same round. Without that, fast movement and flurry do not synergize. By definition. You could try to get pounce, but the only way to do that is to take levels in something that is not monk. Also, not core.

Although there might be a spell that would do it. You do seem to love the UMD. Of course, the round you spend getting pounce from a spell could have been spent moving into melee. Kinda catch 22 there.

[emeraldstreak]

Right. It's not like any of us have builds on the WOTC Theoretical Optimization "Campaign Smashers" List....oh... oh, wait...

Show us your skills. Post an optimized Monk build.

[Nebo_]

Show us your skills. Post an optimized Monk build.

He's already shown us his skills. Where are yours? You keep telling us about them, but we still haven't seen anything from you.

[Skjaldbakka]

I have made two level 11 grapplers. One is a barbarian. (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3542) The other is a monk. (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3541) In the interest of fairness, I will let others critique and compare, and am willing to take advice to tweak either. This pair is restricted to Core only.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

He's already shown us his skills. Where are yours? You keep telling us about them, but we still haven't seen anything from you.Are you referring to the Giamonk that was posted earlier? The one that originally spawned a 6-page thread when it was posted saying why it was wrong? The one that relied on polymorph to be beat than a CR 8 Dire Tiger? Yeah, I don't even count that as a suggestion. Other than that, without a character sheet, I have to resort to this.
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m126/stoopidtallkid/Internet/motivator6921653.jpg

[MeklorIlavator]

When one build does it at a range of 10 feet on a charge, and the other does it at a range of 250' on a standard action, or to 4 diff opponents within that range on a full, then the one is better.

Oh, as for the crusader thing, would it work, if warblade levels were replaced with crusader? then is it still possible? Then why are you being anal about it?

As for the cleric spells? Go bard for a level or two, get cure moderate that way. It's not the spell that does the ability, it's a conjuration(healing) spell. Any class that gets them is available for it.
A)Note Hulking hurler.
B)Can a Crusader qualify for Bloodsorm Blade? I really don't know the answer to that
C) There is one Broken Build in ToB that qualifies as a Campaign Smasher. Look at how many are from Core of Psionics. Note that there are a lot more, some of which are more powerful.
D)Why are we arguing? Why did you post that build in the first place? What was the purpose of all this?

Now, back to my original point:
That the Barbarian out damages ToB unless you're using the BassetKing build, which is cheese and there for not usually considered in argument such as this.

[Nebo_]

Are you referring to the Giamonk that was posted earlier? The one that originally spawned a 6-page thread when it was posted saying why it was wrong? The one that relied on polymorph to be beat than a CR 8 Dire Tiger? Yeah, I don't even count that as a suggestion. Other than that, without a character sheet, I have to resort to this.
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m126/stoopidtallkid/Internet/motivator6921653.jpg

I don't know what Giacomo used to build that monk, but it certainly wasn't skill. No, I was referring to Basset King's optimisation skills and emeraldstreak's apparent lack thereof.

[Talic]

A)Note Hulking hurler.
B)Can a Crusader qualify for Bloodsorm Blade? I really don't know the answer to that
yes

C) There is one Broken Build in ToB that qualifies as a Campaign Smasher. Look at how many are from Core of Psionics. Note that there are a lot more, some of which are more powerful.
How many of those rely on the same mechanic to break it?


D)Why are we arguing? Why did you post that build in the first place? What was the purpose of all this?Someone, and by someone, I mean you, posted something stating that barbarians are more able to break than ToB. It was a disproof. That build, at level 13-14, could reliably beat the average CR 37, with nothing more than a ring of invisibility.


Now, back to my original point:
That the Barbarian out damages ToB unless you're using the BassetKing build, which is cheese and there for not usually considered in argument such as this.
Until you show a build that does more than infinite damage, the above point you just made is disproven by the above build.
And of course the Barb will win, if every TOB build that outdamages the barb is discounted as "cheese". Interesting criteria you have.

Point is, there can be 1,000 barb builds that deal 900 damage a round. If there's 1 ToB build that does more than 900 damage a round, ToB builds can outdamage barb builds. That's the funny thing about 1st place. Only one thing can be in it.

[emeraldstreak]

No, I was referring to Basset King's optimisation skills and emeraldstreak's apparent lack thereof.

I will use my "apparently lacking skills" to improve on Skjaldbakka's Core monk 11 grappler (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3541).

The monk's initial ability scores:

race half-orc
str 20 / 28
dex 13 / 13
con 14
int 6
wis 16 / 18
cha 6

The monk's initial feat selection:

Stunning Fist, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack
Improved Grapple, Deflect Arrows, Improved Trip

The monk's initial equipment:

belt of str +6 /36,000
bracers of armor +3 /9,000
permanencied Enlarge Person /3,040
ring of protection +2 /8,000
gloves of dexterity +2 /4,000
periapt of wisdom +2 /4,000
ring of jumping +5 /2,500

to be continued....

Clarification: I'm going to use the new official rules for magic items, described on p. 233-234 of the Magic Item Compendium. Since this is a core comparison, no items from the MIC will be used, only the new official rules.

race half-orc
str 20 / 26
dex 14 / 14
con 14 / 16
int 10
wis 14 / 16
cha 6

changes made: higher Int for Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Tumble, 1 rank in Jump.

feat selection:

Improved Grapple, Improved Initiative, WF:unarmed, INA:unarmed
Stunning Fist, Deflect Arrows, Improved Trip

equipment:

some equipment slots rearranged per MIC rules

monk's belt (13,000)

gloves of str +4 (16,000)
headband of wisdom +2 (4,000)
periapt of health +2 (4,000)
boots of dexterity +2 (4,000)

bracers of armor +2 (4,000)
ring of protection +1 (2,000)
ion stone (+1 insight AC) (5,000)
vest of natural armor +1 (2,000)

permanencied Enlarge Person (3,040)
permanencied Great Magic Fang CL 20 (8,550)

mwk tools for the skills chosen (~200)

attack +23/+23/+23/+18 4d8+13 (av. 31)

grapple +24/+24/+24/+23 4d8+13 (av. 31)

attacking in grapple +19/+19/+19/+14 4d8+13 (av. 31)

Init +6, speed 60', slow fall 50'
HP 86, wholeness of body 22
AC 22, deflect arrows

Fort +10, purity of body, diamond body
Ref + 9, improved evasion
Wis +10, still mind

hide +14, move silently +18, tumble +17, listen +19, jump +21

[lord_khaine]

Yes, I do. The monk has been less able to deal damage consistently, whether that be because of DR, incorporeal foes, or what have you. It's been a different "reason" every time, but thus far, the monk has proven MORE dependent on magical gear, less able to function without it, and more ineffective than any other class there. The casters, unsurprisingly, have had the majority of the impact, but the barbarian has done the majority of the melee damage. So yes, I'd say that the monk is less able to contribute than the other classes, thus far. He's doing a fine backup job for a rogue, with the exception of being unable to detect or disarm the traps on chests, or unlock the locks on them. He looks like he was designed to be a light scout, but honestly, I think the party would be moving faster with another tank type, or a rogue or bard.


it should be addet here that in the first encounter where noone had any gear the antimagic field preventet the monk from using KI strike to pound the golems into rubble.
in the second encounter, where they still had not gotten their magic weapons back the barbarian had recived a Greater magic weapon spell, getting a +5 bonus to hit and to damage that they monk lacked, as well as the ability to attack the dread wraiths who are incorporal.

so i disagree with your analysis of the barbarians contribution versus the monks, and will also mention have had to relly a lot more on the Mind blank he recived, or else he would proberly have been out of the combat from the start, since we have been forced to take a lot of willsaves.

edit.
also, its only the problem with the enlarge potions that keeps the monk from grappling the walkers.

[Nebo_]

I will use my "apparently lacking skills" to improve on Skjaldbakka's Core monk 11 grappler (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3541).

The monk's initial ability scores:

race half-orc
str 20 / 28
dex 13 / 13
con 14
int 6
wis 16 / 18
cha 6

The monk's initial feat selection:

Stunning Fist, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack
Improved Grapple, Deflect Arrows, Improved Trip

The monk's initial equipment:

belt of str +6 /36,000
bracers of armor +3 /9,000
permanencied Enlarge Person /3,040
ring of protection +2 /8,000
gloves of dexterity +2 /4,000
periapt of wisdom +2 /4,000
ring of jumping +5 /2,500

to be continued....

Your apparent lack of optimisation skills has yielded... an apparent lack of optimisation. Funny, that.

On that topic, there's no reason why the barbarian shouldn't have a shield. He's not using a two handed weapon to increase damage, so a shield would be cheap, easy AC at no cost to effectiveness.

[Skjaldbakka]

And here is my level 13 monk, with Intuitive Attack. I took Zen Archery too, mostly because I think Snatch Arrows 'is cool', and having to-hit with that is nice. Aside from that, core only. Mostly due to lack of books at work, and also laziness. link (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3543)

Witness emeraldstreaks amazing skills. Wait, did he actually say anything? I am positive my builds have room for improvement, but I saw nothing from him.

Remember core only, people. I don't think anyone has made non-core suggestions, but I am trying to minimize non-core influence (even on the monk with wisdom to hit from non-core feats, I don't want any other non-core stuff on him).

I have learned something from the attempt already. Monks have feat room in core to take UMD amplifying feats. There just aren't a lot of good monk feats in core that demand their attention. Ability Focus and Improved Natural Attack are really the only ones that come to mind not granted by the class itself. Maybe power attack as well.

Re: Nebo

I thought about it, but it seems kinda silly to grapple with a shield, don't you think? I suppose I shouldn't let that stop me, though. This is just theoretical, isn't it.

on an unrelated note, I'll be gone 'til midnight EST. Hopefully there will be more suggestions on both sides, to show what core grapplers can do, and whether monk or barbarian is better at it.

I'd like to note that assuming 4 combats/day, the barbarian at level 11 in core can only rage for 3 of them.

[emeraldstreak]

Witness emeraldstreaks amazing skills. Wait, did he actually say anything? I am positive my builds have room for improvement, but I saw nothing from him.

BTW, my "lacking optimization skills" say you might want to check on Improved Grapple requirements (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedGrapple) for your barbarian build.

[Skjaldbakka]

My forgetting that improved grapple has a dexterity requirement is I think a symptom of my opinion of characters that focus on grappling. Which is not high. At any rate, it is a simple thing to fix, and pointing out that error in no way demonstrates your skill at optimizing.

Corrected. I also forgot to apply my stat bumps, btw. Speaking of which, all of these have been 32 pt. buy.

On a side note, I think it is strange from a mechanical advantage standpoint for improved grapple to have a dexterity prerequisite, since you are going to spending most of your time denied your dex as a grappling character.

[emeraldstreak]

Speaking of which, all of these have been 32 pt. buy.


Thought as much.

Still tho, right now the barbarian has:

a base 18 in Str (worth 16 points)
a base 13 in Dex (worth 5)
a base 16 in Con (worth 10)
a base 10 in Wis (worth 2)

total 33 point buy

[Skjaldbakka]

32. The stat boost at 8 went into wisdom. At least I am fairly certain I got it right. I did use the point buy calculator.

double checked my numbers. I haven't applied the level 4 bump, apparently. Should probably go into strength, to give another +1 at level 12, if we assume the build should grow, and into dex, to give a +2, if it is built as if for a one-shot at level 11.

I would like to point out that your optimization skills have not yet provided any actual advice in terms of making either character better. It doesn't take anything special to say 'hey, you forgot to carry the 2'. Or, in this case, that improved grapple has a dexterity prereq, and that I forgot to apply my level based stat boosts.

[emeraldstreak]

32. The stat boost at 8 went into wisdom. At least I am fairly certain I got it right. I did use the point buy calculator.

Then how do you end up at 22 Str before magical enhancements?

18 base + 2 racial + 1 (4th) + ?


Also, all equipment must be paid for large creature, meaning the full plate alone adds 1500 gp in cost.

[Skjaldbakka]

No, it doesn't. Enlarge Person includes your equipment in its effects.

You are however, correct about the point buy. My bad. Corrected. You still haven't optimized anything yet. Just saying. I would think that someone who likes monks and thinks they are not underpowered would be able to do better than someone who likes the idea of the monk and thinks they need some help.

[emeraldstreak]

No, it doesn't. Enlarge Person includes your equipment in its effects.

Of course. Nevermind.



You are however, correct about the point buy. My bad. Corrected. You still haven't optimized anything yet. Just saying. I would think that someone who likes monks and thinks they are not underpowered would be able to do better than someone who likes the idea of the monk and thinks they need some help.

I can tell you a few of the things I would change already. Getting Improved Natural Attack and Weapon Focus:unarmed in place of the Spring Attack line is one. Another is paying for permanencied Greater Magic Fang, CL 20 is about 9k.

[Nebo_]

I can tell you a few of the things I would change already. Getting Improved Natural Attack and Weapon Focus:unarmed in place of the Spring Attack line is one. Another is paying for permanencied Greater Magic Fang, CL 20 is about 9k.

First of all, an unarmed attack isn't a natural attack. Monks qualify for that by virtue of of the wording in their unarmed strike ability. Second, why would he take weapon focus if he's not using an unarmed strike to attack? Armour Spikes.

[emeraldstreak]

First of all, an unarmed attack isn't a natural attack. Monks qualify for that by virtue of of the wording in their unarmed strike ability.


Monks qualify for Magic Fang by virtue of WoTC very clearly stating monk unarmed attack benefits from natural attack effects.



Second, why would he take weapon focus if he's not using an unarmed strike to attack? Armour Spikes.

It is actually possible to attack with light weapons, unarmed strikes, or natural weapons in a grapple, at -4 to attack.

[Illiterate Scribe]

The permanencied magic fang is very vulnerable to dispels, remember.

[emeraldstreak]

Improved Monk is up.

[Nebo_]

Monks qualify for Magic Fang by virtue of WoTC very clearly stating monk unarmed attack benefits from natural attack effects.

It is actually possible to attack with light weapons, unarmed strikes, or natural weapons in a grapple, at -4 to attack.


You missed my point. Twice!

Barbarians don't quailify for INA. That first comment had nothing to do with monks.

I know you can attack with those weapons in a grapple. The point is that the Barbarian in question doesn't use unarmed strikes as his primary weapon, he uses Armour spikes, so Weapon Focus is not particularly useful.

[emeraldstreak]

The permanencied magic fang is very vulnerable to dispels, remember.

It's caster level 20, not that easy to dispel.

The barbarian's spikes are more vulnerable to dispel & shatter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shatter.htm), actually.

And there's also the trick to make a permanencied spell even harder to dispel.

[Kurald Galain]

It's caster level 20, not that easy to dispel.

You're getting that how, exactly? RAW states that "even a metropolis isn’t guaranteed to have a local spellcaster able to cast 9th-level spells."

Besides, if you have two permanencied spells (say, enlarge and magic fang) then every single time an 11th-level caster (or equivalent monster) does a greater dispel on you, you have a 10% chance of permanently losing one of those, which means your character is effectively crippled until you can make it back to a bigger-than-metropolis city.

If dispel is used once per day (which is hardly unlikely), your odds of both spells surviving more than a week are one out of two. If the caster is level 14, those odds are slightly under five percent. Those are not good odds.

[Solo]

It's caster level 20, not that easy to dispel.

The barbarian's spikes are more vulnerable to dispel & shatter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shatter.htm), actually.



And of course, the barbarians spikes are harder to replace that permanancied level 20 spells.


Oh wait.


And there's also the trick to make a permanencied spell even harder to dispel.

Which you will be kind enough to tell us I imagine?

[emeraldstreak]

Besides, if you have two permanencied spells (say, enlarge and magic fang) then every single time an 11th-level caster (or equivalent monster) does a greater dispel on you, you have a 10% chance of permanently losing one of those


An 11th level caster has 5% chance to dispel CL 20 spell, burning his highest spell slot and a combat round in the process.

Meanwhile, a 5th level caster can both dispel and shatter the armor spikes of the barbarian. An 11th level caster can easily dispel and shatter the barbarian's armor, which is more than twice the cost of the permanent magic fang.

[Solo]

Meanwhile, a 5th level caster can both dispel and shatter the armor spikes of the barbarian. An 11th level caster can easily dispel and shatter the barbarian's armor, which is more than twice the cost of the permanent magic fang.

1. Why would you bother dispelling non-magical armor?

2. What is the cost of this armor, and what is the cost of permanant caster level 20 magic fang?

[emeraldstreak]

Which you will be kind enough to tell us I imagine?

When you cast the spell to be permanencied yourself, it can only be dispelled by higher level caster.

So a noncaster who is able to cast the spell somehow (via UMD or whatever) can benefit from this effect.

In the same way, noncasting classes can get permanent spells from the first list, i.e. See Invisibility or Arcane Sight.

[Kurald Galain]

An 11th level caster has 5% chance to dispel CL 20 spell, burning his highest spell slot and a combat round in the process.
Yes, that's precisely what I'm saying. And even if this doesn't happen to you all that often, you will still not be able to keep both of your permanencied spells for a week.



Meanwhile, a 5th level caster can both dispel and shatter the armor spikes of the barbarian.
Sure. But the barbarian isn't crippled by the loss of his armor spikes, whereas your character is most certainly crippled by the loss of his enlarge and/or magic fang. Also, this 5th level caster is burning his highest spell slot and two combat rounds in the process. And it requires two rolls (a CL check and a save for the barb), and it may fail if the barb is enlarged or wears special material armor, because of the weight limits on Shatter.

And that is why "armor spikes for a barb" are a far more solid strategy than "putting several permanencied spells on a monk".

[Solo]

When you cast the spell to be permanencied yourself, it can only be dispelled by higher level caster.

So a noncaster who is able to cast the spell somehow (via UMD or whatever) can benefit from this effect.

In the same way, noncasting classes can get permanent spells from the first list, i.e. See Invisibility or Arcane Sight.

Are you sure that this trick doesn't use the level of the caster who made the scroll you're UMDing?

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

In addition, when it comes to the Magic Armor, to dispel it, it must be a targetd dispel.

However, since Greater Magic Fang is likely to be the highest spell up on you at any given time, every single AoE dispel has a chance to rob you of it. And since you probably intend to place other buffs on yourself as well, a target dispel is more likely on you then on the Barb's armor (in fact, a targeted dispel on the Barb himself is more likely then on his armor) thus further increasing the chance of losing Greater Magic Fang.

Of course if you could make the huge UMD checks on scrolls at this level and expend a much much larger sum of money on scrolls for Permanency and Greater Magic Fang, you could arrange to actually have a most undispellable buff until higher levels.

[emeraldstreak]

Are you sure that this trick doesn't use the level of the caster who made the scroll you're UMDing?

It does. That's why it's best to use a wand when possible (it is for GM Fang).

[emeraldstreak]

Also, this 5th level caster is burning his highest spell slot and two combat rounds in the process. And it requires two rolls (a CL check and a save for the barb), and it may fail if the barb is enlarged or wears special material armor, because of the weight limits on Shatter.

Yey, the 11th level barbarian might do well v one 5th level caster!

But what if there are two of them? One with dispel, and one with shatter? Scary, isn't it?

And what if there's also a 1st level venerable Gray Elf enchanter with spell focus, against a barbarian who has +2 Will save?

[Kurald Galain]

It does. That's why it's best to use a wand when possible (it is for GM Fang).

Cost of armor spikes = 50 gp.

Cost of that wand = 750 * 5 (spell level of permanency) * 20 (caster level desired) = 75000 gp, plus whatever amount of feats and whatnot it costs you to actually pass the UMD check to activate it, plus you haven't actually answered where exactly you're going to get this, because 17th-level casters and higher are not generally assumed to be available at your whim, beck and call.

[Rutee]

Yey, the 11th level barbarian might do well v one 5th level caster!

But what if there are two of them? One with dispel, and one with shatter? Scary, isn't it?

And what if there's also a 1st level venerable Gray Elf enchanter with spell focus, against a barbarian who has +2 Will save?

You know, it's generally considered unkosher to post 'challenges' for someone else without pointing out how your entrant will pass them.

[emeraldstreak]

Cost of that wand = 750 * 5 (spell level of permanency) * 20 (caster level desired) = 75000 gp, plus whatever amount of feats and whatnot it costs you to actually pass the UMD check to activate it, plus you haven't actually answered where exactly you're going to get this, because 17th-level casters and higher are not generally assumed to be available at your whim, beck and call.

Dude, I'm not using this in the monk build. OK?

[emeraldstreak]

You know, it's generally considered unkosher to post 'challenges' for someone else without pointing out how your entrant will pass them.

You're right.

I tested the anti-monkers skill in building monks and the results didn't surprise me.

Next: setting up the melee gauntlet, against real and detailed challenges.

[Kurald Galain]

I tested the anti-monkers skill in building monks and the results didn't surprise me.

On the other hand, you also suggested that a "scary" strategy for two fifth-level casters against an 11th-level barbarian would be a dispel/shatter combo (as opposed to, oh, both dropping a save-or-lose spell, or going invisible). That that particular strategy is so ineffective as to border on the idiotic probably didn't surprise most forum users here.

[Rutee]

....How.. what? How is that posting your solution to the listed challenges?

[Solo]

But what if there are two of them? One with dispel, and one with shatter? Scary, isn't it?


Yay, more squishies.



Dude, I'm not using this in the monk build. OK?
No, you're apparently having a level 20 caster permanancy enchantments onto you, then go back to him every time your enchantments get dispelled.

You still haven't told us how much getting those two spells permanancied by a level 20 caster cost. Please do so.

[horseboy]

Stone giant makes an AoO, +12 vs AC 22. 55% hit chance, average damage, 17.05. Stone giants have hold the line? Ouch!

No, it doesn't. Enlarge Person includes your equipment in its effects.Doesn't EP fade from objects when you're not wearing them or is that negated by the Permanency?

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

No, you're apparently having a level 20 caster permanancy enchantments onto you, then go back to him every time your enchantments get dispelled.

You still haven't told us how much getting those two spells permanancied by a level 20 caster cost. Please do so.

I can answer that question for you, but I bet Emerald isn't going to like the answer.

1) You need two Casters, someone to cast Greater Magic Fang (or a wand at CL 20 to UMD it)
2) Someone to cast Permanency.

Clearly hiring someone to cast the spell is more cost effective then UMDing, both in skill points and gold.

So:
CL 20 x 30gp = 600gp to get Greater Magic Fang

CL 11 x 50gp + (5 x 1,500XP) = 7,050gp.

So that's about 8000gp for just one casting, and note that this is dispellable.

But there are even funnier problems:
1) Casters casting 9th level spells aren't guaranteed, even in a Metropolis. And Druids are the least likely to be there.

Solutions: 1) Find one in the Wild, 2)Bring your own strand of Prayer beads to a level 16 caster, 3) Pay 1/10th the price of a Bead of Karma as per the "Focus" cost.

Both 2 and 3 reduce the spell price a bit, though of course, both have their own costs. And three is not explicitly allowed by RAW.

Problem 2) That Permanency that costs 7,050gp? "If additional costs put the spell cost above 3000gp that spell is not generally available."

More then double the unavailable price? Good luck finding that.

The other option is UMD:

Even if we did go with ridiculous "partially charged wands" and even a "partially charged" staff with only the spell Permanency in it set to CL 11 and arranged for the 1,500XP expenditure it would still cost more then 10,000gp per casting.

And on top of all this, the Permanency spell is very specific about which spells can be dispelled only by higher casters, and it bases this on what spell is permanencied not who cast that spell. So even these 10,000gp castings requiring UMD checks of 31 are dispellable.

The only hope you have of getting this thing at all is with a level dip for UMD as a class skill, or your DM just hand waving all the paid spells limitations away. And we all know that the DM hand waving limitations away is very very bad.

So look, no Permanencied Greater Magic Fang for you. Of course, getting it cast on you by that level 20 Druid (Or even better Extended and then cast) every day for a week is still cheaper then getting it permanencied once.

So unless you think you are going to go a week without it getting dispelled (by an AoE dispel, by a targeted Dispel, ect) you are better off just not getting it permanencied.

[Solo]

And for comparative purposes, how much would this "dispellable and shatterable" armor the barbarian wears cost?

Something tells me it will cost much less, and be more available.

[Aquillion]

You can't pay someone to Permanent Greater Magic Fang you, not even at the minimum CL (11).

A permanent greater magic fang would cost the caster 1500 xp. Paying someone to cost a spell costs you 5 gp per xp they lose, bringing it to 7500 gp (that's before the basic costs of the two spells, which raise it even higher -- much higher, if you want CL 20.) And spells whose additional costs bring them above 3000 gp are not generally available.

If you meant a permanent regular magic fang (+1 hit and damage, woo), it is just within the allowed range... at CL 9. It would cost 50 (for the 5th-level permanency) * 9 (min caster level to permanency magic fang) + 2500 for the xp. And that's assuming you're allowed to calculate the cost separately from the Magic Fang itself, which would otherwise drive it over. If you want a permanent magic fang of above CL 10 (or permanent anything above CL 10, looking at the costs)... sorry, you can't pay someone for it.

And no, casting the Magic Fang at CL 20 and the Permanency at CL 11 won't work. Permanency is Duration: Permanent; if it gets dispelled you're still screwed.

And in any case, remember that CL 17+ casters are, according to the rules, not reliably available... they only exist when the DM specifically chooses to put them in the world, and there's no guarantee there are any available to sell their services at all (in Eberron, say, I'm fairly sure the only canon one in the entire world is evil.)

As an aside: Any dispel that includes you in its area would risk dispelling your magic fangs, while only a dispel specifically targeted at the fighter's magic equipment will do anything at all to it... and even then, its only effect is temporary suppression.

Targeting the armor spikes seperately with Shatter is not possible. They're part of the armor; you must target an entire object, which may exceed the spell's weight limit for lower-level casters (and higher-level ones are going to have better things to do than shatter the fighter's armor.) Even when it doesn't, as an attended item it's entitled to a save... And if it's magic, that's going to be a pretty good one:

Magic items always get saving throws. A magic item’s Fortitude, Reflex, and Will save bonuses are equal to 2 + one-half its caster level. An attended magic item either makes saving throws as its owner or uses its own saving throw bonus, whichever is better. For decent magical armor, that is likely to be quite high.

[Frosty]

Or, in Faerun, your barkeep will probably be high enough level :smallbiggrin:

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

You can't pay someone to Permanent Greater Magic Fang you, not even at the minimum CL (11).

A permanent greater magic fang would cost the caster 1500 xp. Paying someone to cost a spell costs you 5 gp per xp they lose, bringing it to 7500 gp (that's before the basic costs of the two spells, which raise it even higher -- much higher, if you want CL 20.) And spells whose additional costs bring them above 3000 gp are not generally available.

If you meant a permanent regular magic fang (+1 hit and damage, woo), it is just within the allowed range... at CL 9. It would cost 50 (for the 5th-level permanency) * 9 (min caster level to permanency magic fang) + 2500 for the xp. And that's assuming you're allowed to calculate the cost separately from the Magic Fang itself, which would otherwise drive it over. If you want a permanent magic fang of above CL 10 (or permanent anything above CL 10, looking at the costs)... sorry, you can't pay someone for it.

And no, casting the Magic Fang at CL 20 and the Permanency at CL 11 won't work. Permanency is Duration: Permanent; if it gets dispelled you're still screwed.

And in any case, remember that CL 17+ casters are, according to the rules, not reliably available... they only exist when the DM specifically chooses to put them in the world, and there's no guarantee there are any available to sell their services at all (in Eberron, say, I'm fairly sure the only canon one in the entire world is evil.)

As an aside: Any dispel that includes you in its area would risk dispelling your magic fangs, while only a dispel specifically targeted at the fighter's magic equipment will do anything at all to it... and even then, its only effect is temporary suppression.

Targeting the armor spikes seperately with Shatter is not possible. They're part of the armor; you must target an entire object, which may exceed the spell's weight limit for lower-level casters (and higher-level ones are going to have better things to do than shatter the fighter's armor.) Even when it doesn't, as an attended item it's entitled to a save... And if it's magic, that's going to be a pretty good one:
For decent magical armor, that is likely to be quite high.

Thanks for being me but more succinct.

[lord_khaine]

of course, depending on how you rule the gauntlett issue, then it might not be nececary to fool around with permanent spells.

[Kurald Galain]

And for comparative purposes, how much would this "dispellable and shatterable" armor the barbarian wears cost?

Something tells me it will cost much less, and be more available.

Yep. 50 gp, and available in any town that has a blacksmith, and a barbarian can conceivably take the few ranks in craft skills necessary to do that himself.

[Reel On, Love]

Who the hell fights casters who cast Dispel then Shatter? Why would they spend their actions like that? If two casters were facing a barbarian I'd think they'd both cast, oh, Fly. Or Deep Slumber.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Who the hell fights casters who cast Dispel then Shatter? Why would they spend their actions like that? If two casters were facing a barbarian I'd think they'd both cast, oh, Fly. Or Deep Slumber.I like Blindness, personally. Followed by Summon Monster X.

[Sir Giacomo]

Hi again,

from what I glanced over in the thread since my last post: emeraldstreak's build is OK - however, the greater magic fang enhancement is really not that realistic, because it costs too much to be generally available by npc casters.

Maybe greater magic weapon can help, received from wizard or cleric in the group via pearl of power (the monk's hands count as manufactured weapons for this purpose).

Meanwhile, the monk build can take a bit longer due to real life workload. Sorry to keep you waiting!

But one more thing here...


Heya, Freelance! Since there hasn't yet been a build forthcoming from Gia, here's one of the ones he's created, that was made under the auspices and titles of "Most Monkishly monk" he could design.

Without further ado, concrete math that Gia has committed to, on this forum.

So, until we get a different response from Gia, and in spirit of this post from page Fifteen.

We can use this as a base-line for comparison, and to...

Collapse the Schroedinger Monk's Waveform.

Right. It's not like any of us have builds on the WOTC Theoretical Optimization "Campaign Smashers" List....oh... oh, wait...

Bassetking, I am...shocked. After we started so well ages ago in said duel thread with fairplay and everything? What went wrong?
Why this utter unfairness now?
Posting a build that was based on completely different assumptions than what is discussed here to discredit what I am talking about?

Well, for a start, that monk WAS even set to win even against Reel On, Love's Druid. Who - believe it or not, guys - in that combat went through the roof because the monk build used polymorph (synergising greatly with his monk abilities), whereas he thought it completely OK to run around in dire tiger form with his dire tiger animal companion. Incredible!

Well, since my various builds for monks posted on these forums made no use of polymorph to avoid that discussion altogether.

But to provide you the full dimension of Bassetking's double standards: he actually planned to go against the monk build showing class superiority of other classes with a pixie rogue and a ghost spiked chain fighter. AND, while maintaining that of course these characters would be those that would be normal for play, not at all built vs a monk, he used anarchic weapon enchantment on top of that.

THAT is the measure of what he believes is fair.

And what disappoints me most is that there was hardly any objection to what he posted.

- Giacomo

[Vortling]

Giacomo, please let's not have that argument again. Since emerald wants some monk builds I'll put one in once I'm back at my books. Talic seems to be somewhat back so I'm wondering if the monk challenge will be restarted soon.

[Sir Giacomo]

Also, SG, when you get around to it...

You seem to think we're ignoring the flaws of people on our side. I'll admit that this is a possibility.

Of course, you also failed to chastise/restrain/criticize emerald a few pages back while he was being rude to everyone...

Unless I missed it?


If I misinterpreted what you are saying, then ignore this post.

Ignored.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

[Kurald Galain]

Well, for a start, that monk WAS even set to win even against Reel On, Love's Druid.

Hahahahaha!

This is so completely and utterly ridiculous it's the funniest thing I've read today.

:smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin:

I do believe everybody else on the forum has a rather different recollection of that fight than SG does.

[Morty]

Hahahahaha!

This is so completely and utterly ridiculous it's the funniest thing I've read today.

:smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin:

I do believe everybody else on the forum has a rather different recollection of that fight than SG does.

Wasn't that the fight where absolutely nothing happened for a couple of rounds because monk used Smoking Bottle and that was never finished due to DM having real-life issues that forced him to leave the boards?

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

As someone who had no part in any way of this fight, I'd like it if it didn't come up here. Just put that behind us okay? I mean just the race and stats of Giamoco's Monk (not a Giamonk) already proved very elucidating. When we actually see his skills and feats I can only imagine that we will have a nearly full picture of the character.

[Frosty]

What exactly is the definition of a "Giamonk?" Item dependant?

[Kurald Galain]

What exactly is the definition of a "Giamonk?" Item dependant?

A monk that has his ability scores, skills, feats and magical items geared not towards, say, unarmed combat or something similarly monkish, but solely towards maximizing the UMD skill. Then in combat using zero actual monk abilities, and instead using spells like polymorph and divine might, following the maxim of "the best monk is the one that tries hardest at not being a monk".

Simple analysis shows that this kind of build is trumped, by default, by anything that has UMD as a class skill, including but not limited to the Expert NPC class.

Simple analysis also shows that this build is essentially unplayable until it reaches the level where it can reliably pass a DC 20 UMD check, which depending on the amount of cheese or rules lawyering you put in, can be as late as level 17.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

What exactly is the definition of a "Giamonk?" Item dependant?

Higher Cha then Str or Dex, cross class UMD, Wands, Polymorph, buffs everywhere. That's what I've got from it.

Of course any such character would be made ten times better by a single level dip in rogue for UMD as a class skill, but Gia refuses to do that, apparently out of his obsession with proving the Monk balanced. I guess he figures that when people realize that more then half his damage comes from 1 of his 2-20 levels at it isn't the Monk one, that we will all point out this discrepancy and show that UMDing from the Rogue list is what gives him his power.

Of course, we do that know, except we say that UMDing cross-class is the source of most of his power, and that as such, when a cross class skill makes up most of your build, you can do better with other classes, like Expert.

As far as I can tell it's an ongoing argument that Giamoco is actually trying to avoid by stating out a Monk with 14 DEX/Str and only 10 Cha (or was it 12?) to prove that Monks really are balanced. And so when he has taken this rare oppurtunity (primarily through Solo's hounding) to provide us with stats, I don't want to ruin it by dredging up the old Giamonk debate, which despite not being on the Forum the last time around, I am already tired of.

[Solo]

Ignored.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Indeed.


Now, if I may remind you of something?

I've got a task for you, guys, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong in Reel On, Love's post?

Good night to you all.

- Giacomo

I have criticized RoL's post previously.

Now I've got a task for you, to convince me of your fairness. What is wrong with your posts? (Or those of emeraldstreak's if you prefer. )


ps. Your apology for falsely accusing me of subtly manipulating the debate is forthcoming, I assume?

[Frosty]

A monk that has his ability scores, skills, feats and magical items geared not towards, say, unarmed combat or something similarly monkish, but solely towards maximizing the UMD skill. Then in combat using zero actual monk abilities, and instead using spells like polymorph and divine might, following the maxim of "the best monk is the one that tries hardest at not being a monk".

Doesn't this depend on what one defines as "Monkish?" I asked that question a few months ago but didn't get many responses.

[Rutee]

Indeed.

Now, in the interest of fairness, I believe it is time to tell us what is wrong with your own posts?

I believe he has you on Ignore now.



Doesn't this depend on what one defines as "Monkish?" I asked that question a few months ago but didn't get many responses.
Punching People? Grappling? Being Wuxia? I hope it's not the latter, 'cause then Swordsages are by default more Monkish then monks.

[Frosty]

I hope it's not the latter, 'cause then Swordsages are by default more Monkish then monks.

Isn't that the default assumption of most posters?

[Collin152]

I believe he has you on Ignore now.


Thought he did that before.
But that's not how I interpreted it.

[Solo]

Doesn't this depend on what one defines as "Monkish?" I asked that question a few months ago but didn't get many responses.

Monks were inspired by Eastern fantasy. Therefore, monkish abilities are things you see in wuxia films, like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

Good examples of such monkish abilities are hiring NPCs to cast buffs on you with the enormous wealth you, as an ascetic religious devotee have at your disposal, spending your spare time learning how to keep up with other fighters by using magical scrolls and wands to enhance your combat ability, talking with squirrels, etc.

All of these can be found in Wuxia novels such as Tian Long Ba Bu, Shui Hu Zhuan. Xi You Ji, Wo Hu Cang Long, San Guo Yan Yi, and many others, where you see martial artists go around doling out the harshness by using magic items to increase their own powers, with lackeys constantly supplementing them with magic spells.

[Kurald Galain]

Doesn't this depend on what one defines as "Monkish?" I asked that question a few months ago but didn't get many responses.

The fluff of a monk as written in the PHB, as well as in fantasy stories and/or movies featuring monks - which can include Wuxia depending on one's tastes. At any rate, "ascetic disciplined unarmed martial artist" is probably a reasonable definition.

Overall, people who want to run around the battlefield punching people tend to play monks (or possibly, rogues) whereas players who want their character to cast spells tend to play, you know, spellcasters.

And yes, most people (probably all people except one :smallwink: ) are aware that both the unarmed swordsage, and to a lesser extent the unarmed fighter, fill this niche better.

[Rutee]

Isn't that the default assumption of most posters?

Not until just now, when Solo pointed out the "Talks to squirrels" comment.

I mean yes, they were /better/ at it, but I didn't see them as more monkish til now.

[Frosty]

So are you all arguing that a monk using magic items and rings of spell-storing to get Divine Power makes the Monk not a Monk in style?

[Solo]

So are you all arguing that a monk using magic items and rings of spell-storing to get Divine Power makes the Monk not a Monk in style?

Here's the thing.

In Wuxia novels, it is common to see martial artists wielding magic swords and armor, so that's fitting in with the theme.

A ring of Spell Storing with Divine Power is iffy, but I think precedent can be found.

Now, going around waving wands and casting spells off scrolls, on the other hand, is very much different.

A martial artist spends his time doing martial arts (surprise!) not casting spells.

In Wuxia, that's usually left up to the Daoists.

[Rutee]

Half-right, Frosty; When you spend most of your time as a caster, you do not give the impression of a martial artist. Magic Items and the like arne't the crux of it, but combat style is.

[Vortling]

Not until just now, when Solo pointed out the "Talks to squirrels" comment.

I mean yes, they were /better/ at it, but I didn't see them as more monkish til now.

Huh, I've been of the mindset that people thought the unarmed swordsage was more monkish than the monk for a while now. It does have that lovely wuxia flavor to it that the monk really lacks. And without further ado my silly monk build. (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=47151) Using 32 point buy. It's probably full of little errors.

Edit: So very not core.

[Dode]

Legend Of the Giamonk

[Frosty]

Half-right, Frosty; When you spend most of your time as a caster, you do not give the impression of a martial artist. Magic Items and the like arne't the crux of it, but combat style is.

However, often at high levels, unless you have spells or SLAs whether from items or whatnot, you can't really compete. Isn't the giamonk having to resort of heavy UMDing a sympton of 3.5 imbalance in general between spellcasters and non-spellcasters rather than just the monk?

[Rutee]

However, often at high levels, unless you have spells or SLAs whether from items or whatnot, you can't really compete. Isn't the giamonk having to resort of heavy UMDing a sympton of 3.5 imbalance in general between spellcasters and non-spellcasters rather than just the monk?

Certainly. But it's not germane to the question "Why is the Giacomonk not Monkish?" The end result is as it stands; It behaves like a caster first, and a Monk as a distant second. Yes, there are solid effectiveness reasons to do this, but it doesn't change the final result.

Also why get Pounce when you can use the 9 Heads of a Hydra with Improved Unarmed Damage and anything that adds Wis to Hit/Dam? Or does that not work? I'm not that heavy a DnD nerd in truth, so these sortsa questions are up in the air to me? I mean sure there's Ubercharger builds, but why would you have gone down that Feat Tree as a Monk?

[Indon]

Hydra heads are natural weapons - Monk Damage doesn't work with them (though a polymorphed Monkdra can make a full Monk attack and then in addition attack with all his heads).

[Solo]

However, often at high levels, unless you have spells or SLAs whether from items or whatnot, you can't really compete. Isn't the giamonk having to resort of heavy UMDing a sympton of 3.5 imbalance in general between spellcasters and non-spellcasters rather than just the monk?

Giacomo also claims that core is balanced.


Because everyone can exploit cheese.



The end result is as it stands; It behaves like a caster first, and a Monk as a distant second. Yes, there are solid effectiveness reasons to do this, but it doesn't change the final result.

In other words, a warrior who plays caster has chosen the path of defeat.

[Rutee]

Hydra heads are natural weapons - Monk Damage doesn't work with them (though a polymorphed Monkdra can make a full Monk attack and then in addition attack with all his heads).

I don't suppose you could explain the mechanics underlying that. The heads are Unarmed Strikes, right?

[Dode]

No, they're bites, meaning Monk flurry and Unarmed Strike damage doesn't apply.
While a Hydra can feasibly headbutt with its 8 heads, there's no RAW stating that Hydras get 8 headbutt attacks a round, or can swap between bites and butts.
So there'd be no point in doing it.

[Rutee]

So by RAW, a Bite is not similar to an Unarmed Strike? Fair enough. Common sense isn't equivalent with RAW at any rate.

[Zincorium]

I don't suppose you could explain the mechanics underlying that. The heads are Unarmed Strikes, right?

The heads are natural weapons, not unarmed strikes. If they were, hydras would either have the improved unarmed strike feat or provoke 5-12 attacks of opportunity whenever they attacked.

Natural weapons can be used as secondary attacks as part of a full attack with manufactured weapons (which monk fists count as).

[Citizen Jenkins]

I have to admit that the "non-Monkness" argument concerning the Giamonk has always confused me. After all, Wizards were designed to throw fireballs (which caused its own set of problems), Fighters were supposed to have swords and shields, Clerics were more-or-less supposed to heal, and Bards were supposed to sing. A good number of the core classes are optimal when used in ways the designers didn't intend and don't reflect how those classes appear in fiction. Heck, anyone who's tried to play an Arcane necromancer will understand the difference between how the class works in fiction and how it works within D&D. Nor do I understand why Monks are expected to stay within the boundaries of fiction while druids are allowed, if not encouraged, to have a velociraptor as their animal companion.

Also, Kurald, please stop using the "Expert NPC" argument. First, an Expert will never be able to use offensive buff spells like Polymorph to the effect that any melee character will as his BAB, hit points, feats, and class abilities are inferior to any PC class. Nor can an Expert reliably contribute through save-or-dies because his save DCs work off scrolls, which are pretty bad.An Expert is stuck either trying either battlefield control or summoning. Let's cut out the debate over which is more effective, I'm pretty sure we've already argued that, but can we at least agree that the expert and Giamonk use UMD in vastly different ways and cannot be used interchangably.

[Reel On, Love]

Well, for a start, that monk WAS even set to win even against Reel On, Love's Druid. Who - believe it or not, guys - in that combat went through the roof because the monk build used polymorph (synergising greatly with his monk abilities), whereas he thought it completely OK to run around in dire tiger form with his dire tiger animal companion. Incredible!

Well, since my various builds for monks posted on these forums made no use of polymorph to avoid that discussion altogether.
There's a reason EVERYONE acknowledges that Polymorph is broken, Gia. It's because it's broken.
The myth of it synergizing more with monk than with rogue (lots of attacks) or barbarian (stacking rage, AC), or Fighter (reach, size, strength... complete lockdown) has been busted like fifty times.
Using Polymorph (and even having the colossal gall to build around it) is almost on the level of busting out a Candle of Invocation.

You were also not going to win. We've been over this. Polymorphs get dispelled (and you have to go back to the wand, while things eat you). What's more you weren't Polymorphed yet. Any one of two or three wind spells get rid of the smoke, and my animal companion could attack your *square*. Once it hits you, it's touched you, and the Hide wears off. It, the bear, and I tear you to pieces. Trying to claim that Hide from Animals makes them unable to even attack your square upon a direct verbal command (Speak with Animals was up) is patently ridiculous.

The reason Wild Shape isn't considered broken, whereas Polymorph is, is because it's LIMITED. Animals. That's it. That's a much smaller, much less powerful subset of creatures. Polymorph can do *anything*--a Warrior with at-will Polymorph would be brroken. Wild Shape is limited. Like I said, Polymorph alone (spend your money on PAO spells) could let even a Warrior be a functional party member (and, in fact, *better* than a normal Fighter). A character that has nothing but Wild Shape would suck (the offense is worse, and the AC is a LOT worse, the movement modes are more limited)--in fact, the Druid could lose Wild Shape and still be one of the *stronger* classes.

Now that that's settled, my Druid could fit seamlessly into any adventuring party and be one of the MVPs. Your monk couldn't fight anything without Polymorph. Let me rephrase that: you had to use POLYMORPH (the most broken spell in the game short of Gate and Shapechange) for ANY FIGHT to do anything. How would you survive before you got that wand (which is more than a quarter of your WBL, btw, and therefore you shouldn't've had in the first place)? Run away a lot?
The smoke bottle was another one of those things that can't work in a game. You yourself have admitted you haven't used it; I don't know anyone who would accept a party member blinding and choking them that way. The party would have to build itself around YOUR item, because of your inability to fight enemies without it.

[Dode]

Also, Kurald, please stop using the "Expert NPC" argument. First, an Expert will never be able to use offensive buff spells like Polymorph to the effect that any melee character will as his BAB, hit points, feats, and class abilities are inferior to any PC class. BAB through ring holding charge of Divine Power, hit points change via Polymorph, takes melee feats like anyone else, proceeds to give himself buffs and abilities better then any class ability.


I'm pretty sure we've already argued that, but can we at least agree that the expert and Giamonk use UMD in vastly different ways and cannot be used interchangably. No. Time to fight the permanently invisible, flying weightless Polymorphed Will O'Wisp Expert w/ smoking bottle and then argue about how Expert is a viable PC class.

[Zincorium]

Citizen Jenkins, the main problem with the Giamonk specifically is that it relies on UMD and spells, the former of which isn't a class skill for monks (and is generally done much more effectively by rogues, warlocks, artificers, etc.) and the latter of which is not a monk class feature.

When monks start getting polymorph or divine power as abilities and get UMD as a class skill, Giacomo's arguments will start to be convincing. But as it is, he's continually using things that have nothing to do with monks, nor would even exist in a game without high-level NPCs. It's been shown again and again that his tactics don't fall within the scope of monks in normal play.

[horseboy]

When monks start getting polymorph or divine power as abilities and get UMD as a class skill, Giacomo's arguments will start to be convincing. And Divine Power stops being Range: Personal. :smallannoyed:

[Solo]

I have to admit that the "non-Monkness" argument concerning the Giamonk has always confused me. After all, Wizards were designed to throw fireballs

Which is why only a handful of wizard spells per level are blasting spells, and there are but two schools with lost of damage spells.


Fighters were supposed to have swords and shields

Which is why so many 2 handed weapons exist, you get 1.5 times your strength bonus to damage when wielding a 2 handed weapon, and power attack give you double PA damage on a 2 handed attack.


Clerics were more-or-less supposed to heal
Which is why they have heavy armor proficiencies, medium BAB, good fort and will saves,and many Save or X spells and combat buffs, including self only spells that turn them into gods of war.


and Bards were supposed to sing.

Which is why the PHB describes them as jacks of all trades.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Also, Kurald, please stop using the "Expert NPC" argument. First, an Expert will never be able to use offensive buff spells like Polymorph to the effect that any melee character will as his BAB, hit points, feats, and class abilities are inferior to any PC class. Nor can an Expert reliably contribute through save-or-dies because his save DCs work off scrolls, which are pretty bad.An Expert is stuck either trying either battlefield control or summoning.

Except you'll note that of those things you listed: BAB, Hit points, and feats, and class abilities the Expert equals the Monk in 2 of the four. And if your entire build is based around UMD, UMD as a class skill is arguably a better Class ability then anything else.

An Expert has Expeditious Retreat to exceed or equal a Monk for a very long time, Polymorph/Polymorph Any Object can give him the boosts needed later. Not to mention just the Fly spell.

He doesn't get the Natural attacks and Monk attack in Polymorph, but he doesn't need then, since just the Natural attacks already make him better then any Core Fighter who doesn't UMD or have someone Polymorphing him.

And depending on how seriously you take the Emulate Class feature entry he can Batman better then a Wizard by using a Staff, Just declare himself a Sorcerer and use his already boosted Charisma, and Emulate a CL much higher then a Comparable level Wizard.

At level 1 the human Expert can have a UMD mod of +13 or +15 if you allow master work items. He can hit a DC 20 on a one at level 5 without any magic items. At level 16 he has the same Cha as a Sorcerer at 28 + Whatever he spent on a Tome, He also has a +30 Item UMD, the master work +2, and 19 ranks for a total Check Mod of +60 or higher, meaning he casts spell from a staff at CL 41 or higher with the Saving throws of a full Sorcerer. He already beats Circle Magic Cheese at level 16.


However, often at high levels, unless you have spells or SLAs whether from items or whatnot, you can't really compete. Isn't the giamonk having to resort of heavy UMDing a sympton of 3.5 imbalance in general between spellcasters and non-spellcasters rather than just the monk?

Which would be a great point except that the only thing that Giamoco is more well know for then his ardent defense of Monks is his Ardent Defense of Core being 100% balanced and all classes being equal contributers. Apparently through UMD, because without it, Monks wouldn't compare to Casters.

[Skjaldbakka]

Weapon Focus is a trap. +1 to hit is kinda pointless at any level, compared to the ability to get out of melee when your initial grapple check fails, and the ability to not provoke from your movement through your target's reach, if he has reach. Which is why I went for spring attack.


I tested the anti-monkers skill in building monks and the results didn't surprise me.

Really. Given your advice to take weapon Focus, your credibility is rapidly sinking.


Doesn't EP fade from objects when you're not wearing them or is that negated by the Permanency?

I'm not sure. I might want to swap out Cleave for Endurance, so I don't have to take off the armor to sleep. As for bathing . . . barbarian. Once in a while the wizard might get fed up with his smell and use prestidigition, but I doubt the barbarian is going to care one bit about his smell.

As for the dispels, I don't think either suffers to terribly much from losing Enlarge Person. It only cost 3K, and they are still almost as good w/o it. I could probably afford to drop it entirely, especially if the party wizard preps enlarge person, or I buy him a wand for 750.

Also, since Emeraldstreak lacked the courtesy to actually post his monk update, and instead chose to edit it into a previous post, several pages back, here is a link. link (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4100512&postcount=593)

LOL, Weapon Focus.

Also, he is using MIC, which is not core, and not readily available for perusal for a lot of people, including me. Since wisdom being an amulet slot is a major drawback in core (as it competes with + con, and + natural armor), that is a significant change. I hope Giacomo hasn't quit the thread, as I'd like someone who knows better than to take Weapon Focus when trying to optimize a build. At least, I assume Sir Giacomo knows better than that.



The reason Wild Shape isn't considered broken, whereas Polymorph is, is because it's LIMITED.

Actually, from what I've seen on these boards, Wild Shape is generally considered to be broken. I think part of it is the hours/level duration. Dire Bear with spells all day, anyone? As long as I make it to level 7-8, I don't need any physicals. Which leads to SAD, except in AMFs.

[horseboy]

I'm not sure. I might want to swap out Cleave for Endurance, so I don't have to take off the armor to sleep. As for bathing . . . barbarian. Once in a while the wizard might get fed up with his smell and use prestidigition, but I doubt the barbarian is going to care one bit about his smell.I was thinking more about "How would he poop?" :smalleek:
Actually, from what I've seen on these boards, Wild Shape is generally considered to be broken. I think part of it is the hours/level duration. Dire Bear with spells all day, anyone? As long as I make it to level 7-8, I don't need any physicals. Which leads to SAD, except in AMFs.It's broken because of Natural Spell.

[Aquillion]

Nor do I understand why Monks are expected to stay within the boundaries of fiction while druids are allowed, if not encouraged, to have a velociraptor as their animal companion.Well, to be fair, druids aren't really based on anything. The D&D version of the druid has almost nothing in common with anything in the real world beyond the name, and had no representation in anything in fantasy (the closest thing I can think of is Asterix's Getafix, but even he wasn't really all that nature-oriented. It was just something they made up for some reason.) Out of the core classes, druids are the only ones the creators of D&D really invented whole-cloth; why they decided to name them after the practicioners of a totally unrelated real-world religion is anyone's guess. (To be fair, we know so little about the actual religion of the druids that they pretty much had to invent the faith whole-cloth. It is known, though, that much of their religion was focused on predicting the future, that they performed human sacrifices, and that they believed in reincarnation -- the spell of the same name may be the only point of overlap between D&D druids and their real-world counterparts.)

Regarding the other classes, though, you are wrong on all points. The Bard class description explictly notes that they are free to base their abilities around any usage of Perform; there is no specific support for swords or shields above other weapons anywhere in the fighter's class or in any of their descriptions; wizards are explictly given multiple schools of magic, of which evocation is only one; clerics are described as a type of holy warrior and given light armor, 3/4ths BAB, weapons proficencies, etc.

Whereas there is absolutely nothing anywhere in the Monk class to even hint at UMD; in earlier editions, where the skill was restricted, it was impossible for them to use it at all, and even now they are among the worst classes there is at it. There is more support for pure wizards wading into melee than there is for monks using UMD.

[Solo]

Out of the core classes, druids are the only ones the creators of D&D really invented whole-cloth; why they decided to name them after the practicioners of a totally unrelated real-world religion is anyone's guess. (

Well, I guess they wanted to have Nature Clerics that weren't like all the other clerics?

[Skjaldbakka]

I was thinking more about "How would he poop?"

Interesting question, and one that doesn't often come up in RP. Possibilities:

1) Custom modifications to the plate to allow for this action.

2) He doesn't. There are no rules for pooping. :smallyuk:

3) Portable Hole Diaper. Please don't take that any more seriously than #2.

4) I'm not entirely certain whether it is a bad thing for him to take off the armor when enlarged or not. If it is , then that is a problem. If he buys large armor, he has to be enlarged to where it. If he doesn't then he has to be reduced to put it back on after he takes it off. Which could be a solution, except that wizards aren't going to want to take Reduce Person, which makes buying a Pearl of Power doesn't work as well for a bribe, since the wizard is still stuck with a Reduce Person spell prepared, instead of an effective level 1 spell.

[Talic]

Weapon Focus is a trap.

Not bad when you get it free, such as, I believe, Warblades get. Not incredibly bad if you allow retraining, or if you need it to qual for a PrC anyway. Still, it isn't optimized, unless you're really cracking one attack, and have an extra feat to burn.


Interesting question, and one that doesn't often come up in RP. Possibilities:

1) Custom modifications to the plate to allow for this action.

2) He doesn't. There are no rules for pooping. :smallyuk:

3) Portable Hole Diaper. Please don't take that any more seriously than #2.
Sphere of Poo Annihilation ??

Seriously, it's a shame that half a dozen races don't need to breath, a couple can be built to never need to eat or drink, but none are poopless.

[Skjaldbakka]

Swordsages get it free, not warblades. Warblades get Weapon Aptitude.

+1 to hit is kinda meh, unless it is a prereq. It is better than Toughness, but I'd almost rather take Stealthy, or Skill Focus: (opposed skill X).

There are also feats that give you extra options in combat, which is what I would much rather take. I suppose Monk has feat room, in core, so Weapon Focus is theoretically viable, but it doesn't help much.

If you don't eat or drink, you don't poop either. So I guess a ring of sustenance would work.

[Reel On, Love]

Actually, from what I've seen on these boards, Wild Shape is generally considered to be broken. I think part of it is the hours/level duration. Dire Bear with spells all day, anyone? As long as I make it to level 7-8, I don't need any physicals. Which leads to SAD, except in AMFs.

That's not Wild Shape--Wild Shape is just overpowreed. "Dire Bear with spells" requires you to be a Druid (as opposed to, say, a Wild Shape ranger variant, which has never been accused of overpoweredness) *and take Natural Spell*--Natural Spell (and, by extension, spellcasting) is the bigger problem.

The druid's so powerful because he has Wild Shape AND an animal companion AND spellcasting. Remove spellcasting and he isn't powerful anymore. Remove Wild Shape and he's still really powerful.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Seriously, it's a shame that half a dozen races don't need to breath, a couple can be built to never need to eat or drink, but none are poopless.

If you don't eat you don't poop.

Of course Undead never poop. Why do you think 400 year old elves really become liches? It ain't cause they are afraid of dieing, they've just been living in the same tower for 100 years and they don't want to deal with that crap anymore (literally and figuratively).

[Sir Giacomo]

Hi again,

well, for a start, some corrections of what has been maintained:
- you can use monk unarmed strikes in a hydra form with heads (head-butts; the hydra attacks are bites). And that the monk uses morph better than any other class is no "myth". It's obvious from the devotion of this class to unarmed combat (and using higher damage with it, exceeding eventually anything creatures offer on their own since the size boosts the monk damage even further. This is also the reason why the morphing expert never has any chance to keep up with the monk in that respect, nor can he vs maxed humanoid weapon-fighting barbarians, rogues, rangers and fighters). Any class using spells is more limited in either spellcasting or morph forms to choose from, any class using weapons is likewise hampered in morph form. It's quite easy.

- I'd never dream about putting Solo on "ignore" - his comments are way too entertaining to do that :smallsmile:
And to answer Solo what is wrong in emeraldstreak's and my posts: I have no idea. It's a rethoric trick of yours, nothing else. It may have been that emeraldstreak got provoked a bit too much and overdid his posts in the beginning - and I guess one of his remarks was scrubbed (so I don't now what it was).
Solo, do you not see why I think it odd that you have "accidently" maintained the monk has even to use a melee attack roll to even grapple, greatly reducing his usefulness? You are discussing in this thread about a monk's usefulness and you maintain you have no idea about how grapple rules work? That's hard to believe.
And even so, making boastful posts maintaining "my monk can do this", and "your maxing fu is weak", or "your monk never stands a chance vs my caster at 3rd level already" are vastly different from bringing completely wrong rules perceptions into the game to make a point that one class sucks.
(also like that cross-class skill-raising would cost you 2 points/level, found nicely guys!)

- the monk in the duel vs Reel on, Love's duel had polymorph already up (pixie first, escaping the wall of thorns easily, then treant, planting himself in front of the casting druid- the moment he had moved, the antilife shell would have been gone), non-dispellable since there was no line of sight (smoke was up). The animal companion did not know where the monk was (actually it insisted the monk did no longer exist with its animal brain), but unfortunately while druid and ac were eagerly communicating and not moving silently, the DM somehow forgot to update me every round where they were. I can think of no method how the druid would have been able to ever overcome the smoking effect consistently (he would have run out of large enough air elementals quite fast). Eventually the ac would have been squished by the treant monk when she chose to do so; then at one point or another the antilife shell would have been over. This is what I meant by waiting out buffs, which greatly puts the non-casters ahead of non-casters. Well, I would not exclude that in some short windows of opportunity (the air cleared for some rounds by an air elemental whirlwind), the monk would have been targetable by druid spells (remember the monk had mirror image up, and could do so again every round). But somehow the monk's great defenses made her unlikely to be taken out by some save-or-die.
But the main point I raised, regardless of how the duel has run/would have continued, remains: Reel on, Love thinks the 1min/lvl polymorph is broken, whereas the all day long wildshaping druid is just fine. Am I really the only one seeing this irony? Come on, guys. The best morph offers is faster/better movement, higher natural AC, and higher STR/DEX, bigger size and some spc attacks (like pounce and poison). The druid animal forms are only a bit behind what morph offers at the respective levels, not enough to justifiy saying morph is overpowered while the longer-lasting wildshape is OK.

- on the "Giamonk" definition. Well, since the term was first brought up by Kurald Galain, it is actually up to him to define what he believes this should constitute.
In my view it is a monk who makes intelligent use of his (magic) equipment to enhance what he already does well/best. This can be done with or without UMD. In essence, I am interpreting the monk (who already has some magic-like class abilities to start with) as some sort of gish IN CASE HE WISHES TO GO AGAINST/KEEP UP WITH MAGIC-USING FOES IN A DEFAULT CORE RULES CAMPAIGN GREATLY INFLUENCED BY MAGIC.
Solo, you are not actually saying that a monk should not use equipment (except the occiasional staff +3), because that is not what this class is about fluffwise? Yes, and the shining knight paladin should never ever dream about using a wand (even if he has good CHR for UMD, or if he has the spell on his class list). Wholeheartedly agree to your fluff perception here. But unfortunately we are discussing here whether by the rules, the monk can compete. And this he can, since wbl is part of the rules.


Now, as some final remark, a short history of the Giamonk and to what lengths the "monk sucks" fraction go to deny it's possible for a monk to keep up:

1. Monk duel vs druid. Monk build is bad, because it uses a "stupid" eversmoking bottle (which happens to shut down most of the spells usually prepared by spellcasters). And morph is broken, while wildshape is not.
Result: I start to build monks without use of morph, and even leave out the bottle in some cases (although that item is certainly RAW, but some would also maintain that is "broken", so it would be also out - how convenient to ban all stuff that help the monk but make life hard for casters, isn't it?)

2. Monk builds and arguments are also based on UMD. Now the "monk-suckage" fraction goes through the roof. "What are you thinking, Gia? Using a cross-class skill? That is not showing the strength of a class, it's a weakness. Do that without UMD. Or my expert with maxed UMD stomps your monk to death in morphed form" (ah, the hilarity of it...)
"And while you're at it, please no partially charged wands" (although it's RAW)", because otherwise scrolls would make no sense" (they do, but only for low-level spellcasters able to take the scribe scroll feat, and for spells of level 5-9).

3. Then some monk builds are posted using rings of spell storing and npc spellcasting buffs. Again uproar. "How could you! Using wealth for an (even meant to be ascetic) monk to make your point? And where again are the spells for the ring coming from? And what makes you even think you can buy everything you need?" (er...the rules?) "Well, you can be sure that no cleric of mine would ever help you."
Shy suggestions of mine, that you could use different methods are similarly shot down, although they are all RAW:
- using leadership for free spellcasting cohorts ("broken")
- using diplomacy to get cheaper npc spellcasting ("broken" - funny thinking about this, since you can easily gain big wealth through the skills crafting, sleight-of-hand, forgery etc.-, and "adventures almost never are in/near cities")
- using pearls of power ("you're using up all of your wealth, where you SHOULD buy that important staff+3 to keep you sucking".)

In total, spellcasters are uber, because they can replace entire class abilities (invisibility, silence, summoning fighters, etc.). But a non-caster doing the same to the casters? That's a definite no-no. And definitely "un-monkish".:smallamused:
Frosty in posts above made already some very insightful comments into that direction.

Guess what. The "Giamonk" I plan to post will use everything of the above. Well, except for the morphing stuff (ah, but the possibilities in perfect self form to morph lost...a pity), since there are official WoTC recommendations not to use it in the core rules form.
Plus, leadership is also out - since the cohort would never be able to accompany the monk on the adventures meant for his level and survive consistently. Plus, it's entirely up to the DM whether the monk is able to attract a spellcasting cohort or not.

- Giacomo

[Ryusacerdos]

There are hybrid Caster/Monk PrCs - Enlightened Fist (Arcane) and Sacred Fist (Divine).

So you wouldn't even need the magic items, and all you're losing is a few class abilities easily replaced by spells. (Also unarmed damage progression replaced by spells, Self-Polymorphs/Divine Power & Divine Favor)

[Reel On, Love]

Hi again,

well, for a start, some corrections of what has been maintained:
- you can use monk unarmed strikes in a hydra form with heads (head-butts; the hydra attacks are bites). And that the monk uses morph better than any other class is no "myth". It's obvious from the devotion of this class to unarmed combat (and using higher damage with it, exceeding eventually anything creatures offer on their own since the size boosts the monk damage even further. This is also the reason why the morphing expert never has any chance to keep up with the monk in that respect, nor can he vs maxed humanoid weapon-fighting barbarians, rogues, rangers and fighters). Any class using spells is more limited in either spellcasting or morph forms to choose from, any class using weapons is likewise hampered in morph form. It's quite easy.
It IS a myth. "Unarmed combat"? Man, who CARES. The rogue gets tons of sneak attacks (and so much AC he doesn't care about being in melee anymore). The Fighter gains huge size, strength, and reach: all he needs to do is carry around a Huge guisarme/chain. Suddenly, he locks down all opponents while doing enormous damage. The Barbarian is *even stronger*, and again, no longer cares about his AC. The Cleric, even, still casts Divine Power, Righteous Might, etc. *on top of* the Polymorph form.
So stop spreading the myth. Yes, the monk benefits a lot. Everyone does.


- the monk in the duel vs Reel on, Love's duel had polymorph already up (pixie first, escaping the wall of thorns easily, then treant, planting himself in front of the casting druid- the moment he had moved, the antilife shell would have been gone), non-dispellable since there was no line of sight (smoke was up). The animal companion did not know where the monk was (actually it insisted the monk did no longer exist with its animal brain), but unfortunately while druid and ac were eagerly communicating and not moving silently, the DM somehow forgot to update me every round where they were. I can think of no method how the druid would have been able to ever overcome the smoking effect consistently (he would have run out of large enough air elementals quite fast). Eventually the ac would have been squished by the treant monk when she chose to do so; then at one point or another the antilife shell would have been over. This is what I meant by waiting out buffs, which greatly puts the non-casters ahead of non-casters. Well, I would not exclude that in some short windows of opportunity (the air cleared for some rounds by an air elemental whirlwind), the monk would have been targetable by druid spells (remember the monk had mirror image up, and could do so again every round). But somehow the monk's great defenses made her unlikely to be taken out by some save-or-die.
Actually, running out of air elementals isn't a problem. I summon 1d4+1 of them, and they Whirlwind one at a time. I can also extend the 1-round...

...Oh, and then there's Control Winds. That was coming up when buffing finished. Care to read what that does?

Save-or-dies were a problem. What was your Fort save, again? Oh, yeah, +11. What was my Baleful Polymorph DC? 23? 24? Something like that. Ooh, looks like that's a 50%+ chance to turn you into a squirrel.

You can activate one wand a round. A Dispel strips *all* your buffs (and the companion can actually strip your images just by attacks). I had more than one dispel. What do you do when you have no concealment and is dispelled?


But the main point I raised, regardless of how the duel has run/would have continued, remains: Reel on, Love thinks the 1min/lvl polymorph is broken, whereas the all day long wildshaping druid is just fine. Am I really the only one seeing this irony? Come on, guys. The best morph offers is faster/better movement, higher natural AC, and higher STR/DEX, bigger size and some spc attacks (like pounce and poison). The druid animal forms are only a bit behind what morph offers at the respective levels, not enough to justifiy saying morph is overpowered while the longer-lasting wildshape is OK.
Are you freaking kidding me? +4 vs. +13 natural AC is no big deal?
Yes, Polymorph DOES offer better movement types and speed, higher AC, higher STR/DEX/CON, bigger size, more attacks, bigger reach, and more special attacks. That's pretty much EVERYTHING. Believe me, there are no animal forms that compare to what you can get via Polymorph. Polymorph can do *anything*, and gives much bigger bonuses. On top of that, it doesn't absorb your gear! Wild Shape is a bit behind.

Again, the Wild Shape ranger isn't overpowered in any way. Meanwhile, a Druid *without* Wild Shape would still be very powerful.

I've gone over this. Druids are very overpowered. Wild Shape is NOT what makes them overpowered--it's the combination of Wild Shape with an animal companion, Natural Spell, and spellcasting. Nobody's saying druids are "OK", but Wild Shape is definitely not in Polymorph's league. As witness:
-Wild Shape does not make CR-appropriate encounters a cakewalk. Polymorph inevitably does (if melee is a threat at all).
-A Warrior with Wild Shape at will could not make a viable party member. A Warrior with Polymorph at will is better than any core melee build. (Do you see the difference there?)


1. Monk duel vs druid. Monk build is bad, because it uses a "stupid" eversmoking bottle (which happens to shut down most of the spells usually prepared by spellcasters). And morph is broken, while wildshape is not.
Result: I start to build monks without use of morph, and even leave out the bottle in some cases (although that item is certainly RAW, but some would also maintain that is "broken", so it would be also out - how convenient to ban all stuff that help the monk but make life hard for casters, isn't it?)
I've explained over and over how Polymorph is broken. The simplest demonstration is that IT MAKES CR-APPROPRIATE ENCOUNTERS TRIVIAL.

The bottle isn't "broken", it's just totally unfeasible in a real game. Your party has to build around this item, or it hurts more than it helps. It only works in solo duels.

Your monk build was "bad", because it was completely unworkable in a game. How would you even survive until you got Polymorph? By hiding during every fight? It relied on Polymorph--for EVERY fight, your melee abilities were crap without it--and spent MORE than a quarter of WBL on a wand which it would burn through in 13 encounter-days (two or three levels!). And this is how you show that monks make good PCs? By doing things which are completely unviable in a game?
I could have UMDed Polymorph too, Gia. I didn't. I could have used a Candle of Invocation. I didn't. I could have had an elemental dump Dust of Sneezing and Choking on you. I didn't.

There's a reason you have to keep reaching for outlandish, unworkable tactics, Giacomo. It's because the monk isn't a good class. If it was a good class, it could melee WITHOUT a smoking bottle (that shuts down its whole party) and Polymorph (which makes a Warrior great, too, and is so broken even WotC admits it).
I'm surprised you haven't pulled out a Candle of Invocation yet to show how good monks are.


2. Monk builds and arguments are also based on UMD. Now the "monk-suckage" fraction goes through the roof. "What are you thinking, Gia? Using a cross-class skill? That is not showing the strength of a class, it's a weakness. Do that without UMD. Or my expert with maxed UMD stomps your monk to death in morphed form" (ah, the hilarity of it...)
"And while you're at it, please no partially charged wands" (although it's RAW)", because otherwise scrolls would make no sense" (they do, but only for low-level spellcasters able to take the scribe scroll feat, and for spells of level 5-9).
Again and again, partially-charged wands ARE NOT RAW. RAW, you can FIND them. You can sell the ones YOU buy and partially use. But "wand with X charges" is NOT on the item tables. RAW, you can buy wands. You can't buy partially charged wands. Partially charged wands aren't RAW for a reason--it makes no sense.

You also make no attempts to account for the EXPENSIVENESS of UMD. 50 wand charges get used up, when you rely on them! Buying the wand once with WBL doesn't represent how expensive buying multiple wands (progressively more of them throughout your career) is. And what about those fights when you DON'T get to prepare? Despite what you seem to think, in actual games, they're the norm, not the exception!


3. Then some monk builds are posted using rings of spell storing and npc spellcasting buffs. Again uproar. "How could you! Using wealth for an (even meant to be ascetic) monk to make your point? And where again are the spells for the ring coming from? And what makes you even think you can buy everything you need?" (er...the rules?) "Well, you can be sure that no cleric of mine would ever help you."
Shy suggestions of mine, that you could use different methods are similarly shot down, although they are all RAW:
The problem with NPC spellcasting buffs and rings of spell storing is that you can't get them constantly. Getting a Ring of Spell Storing refilled four times a day means you're using four 4th or 5th level spell slots every day. As I pointed out, the rest of the party needs those slots, too, including the cleric--who's already giving you buffs.
NPC spellcasting? Sure, it's a great idea, *if you know you'll be fighting within the next X and are in a city*. Even in a city-based campaign, how can you count on finding an NPC caster with the exact spell you want prepared right between fights? Let's say you're breaking into a slaver compound. Do you beat up the guards at the entrance, run off to find a wizard, then another wizard, then another one (who finally already has the spell known and prepared), pay him, and then run back for the next fight?
And that's in a city-*based* campaign. I don't know about you, but in the games I play, cities tend to be *stopping points*--springboards for adventure that take you into enemy lairs, into dungeons, into the wilderness.
You have yet to explain how you can make sure you always have these NPC/spell-stored buffs. You finally suggested buying four Pearls of Power...
...even though you wouldn't have money for stat-boosters, save-boosters, attack and AC boosters, etc, that way! Sorry, you can't afford four Pearls of Power IV for QUITE a while. Even then, the 114,000 gp a Ring of Spell Storing and four Pearls of Power are QUITE the investment (half of your WBL at level 16, was it?)



- using leadership for free spellcasting cohorts ("broken")
Yes, Leadership gets you a SECOND CHARACTER. Again, your buffed monk then has to compete with *two* wizards, or a Barbarian and a wizard, or etc, since everyone can take Leadership (and due to the monk's MAD, you're not even as good at getting a level-appropriate cohort). Leadership is a special option in the DMG. What's more, your DM designs and builds your cohort!


- using diplomacy to get cheaper npc spellcasting ("broken" - funny thinking about this, since you can easily gain big wealth through the skills crafting, sleight-of-hand, forgery etc.-, and "adventures almost never are in/near cities")
Gaining WBL-disproportionate wealth through crafting, sleight-of-hand, etc, is never considered an option. Forgery can theoretically get you large sums, but it's risky... and you're either going to lose some/all of it, or start getting low loot to even out your WBL. If you were suggesting a monk who used Forgery to make lots of money to buy NPC spellcasting, you'd be shot down, too.
Diplomacy makes people friendly. It doesn't get them to effectively give you money (presumably, spellcasters who sell spells make a living doing so. By giving you a spell, they're not selling it! That's more than friendly).
Incidentally, how does your monk afford Diplomacy? You have UMD and four skills, with 10 INT. What are they?


- using pearls of power ("you're using up all of your wealth, where you SHOULD buy that important staff+3 to keep you sucking".)
4 pearls of power IV and a ring of spell storing cost 114k together. That's half your level 16 WBL. If you really want to do that, go ahead, and you can count on having Divine Power (or whatever) to use each fight for your build... but then you'll get to see the effects of not having half your WBL to spend (flight? freedom of movement? Cloak of Resistance? Stat-boosters?).


Guess what. The "Giamonk" I plan to post will use everything of the above. Well, except for the morphing stuff (ah, but the possibilities in perfect self form to morph lost...a pity), since there are official WoTC recommendations not to use it in the core rules form.
If you keep on doing ridiculous things like not being able to fight without expensive consumables, we'll keep on ridiculing your builds.
There's a REASON you have to stretch so hard to try to make the monk class workable. If you ask me to build a druid or cleric or wizard or melee build, I don't have to pull any of this crap. I can make a character that would fit in with pretty much any adventuring party and be enormously useful.
That's even the case for a core-only melee character (although that's harder).

Building a character that can burn through a bunch of consumables to contribute, if he has however much time he needs to prepare, is pointless. So is building a character that can fight in melee... if he builds around having an item that makes the rest of his party unable to fight. These things show that apparently the monk just can't cut it.


Plus, leadership is also out - since the cohort would never be able to accompany the monk on the adventures meant for his level and survive consistently. Plus, it's entirely up to the DM whether the monk is able to attract a spellcasting cohort or not.

- Giacomo
Leadership is out because getting a second character doesn't show that your first character is good. If you take Leadership, compare your characters to other characters with leadership. You might be viable if a spellcaster spends all his spells buffing you... but a barbarian whose cohort spellcaster spends his spells like normal spellcasters do will do a hell of a lot better.

And, yes, what kind of cohort you get and how he's built is entirely up to the DM.

[Talic]

Hi again,
- you can use monk unarmed strikes in a hydra form with heads (head-butts; the hydra attacks are bites).

Truth. However, the hydra won't get any extra attacks based on number of heads with unarmed strikes. You get natural attack pattern or extra iterative attacks; not both. You can't also pick the attack pattern of the natural attack without using the natural attack.


And that the monk uses morph better than any other class is no "myth". It's obvious from the devotion of this class to unarmed combat (and using higher damage with it, exceeding eventually anything creatures offer on their own since the size boosts the monk damage even further. This is also the reason why the morphing expert never has any chance to keep up with the monk in that respect, nor can he vs maxed humanoid weapon-fighting barbarians, rogues, rangers and fighters). Any class using spells is more limited in either spellcasting or morph forms to choose from, any class using weapons is likewise hampered in morph form. It's quite easy.
So a sorceror can cast shapechange less times per day than a monk? Interesting, considering I thought that not casting was the most limited a class could be in spellcasting. :smallamused:



1. Monk duel vs druid. Monk build is bad, because it uses a "stupid" eversmoking bottle (which happens to shut down most of the spells usually prepared by spellcasters).
And morph is broken, while wildshape is not.

2. Monk builds and arguments are also based on UMD. Now the "monk-suckage" fraction goes through the roof.

3. Then some monk builds are posted using rings of spell storing and npc spellcasting buffs.

- using leadership for free spellcasting cohorts ("broken")

- using diplomacy to get cheaper npc spellcasting

- using pearls of power


Ok, let's review. Things that charop has argued are overpowered, since long before Giamonk was thought of.

UMD
Polymorph
Leadership
Diplomancy

Find it odd that your build attempts to unholy union all 4 together? And only achieves parity, at best, rather than surpassing everyone in the dust, when using every ability that the munchkins say is overpowered?

Further, the guides for NPC casting specifically include that for a caster to follow you around to cast on demand will be significantly more expensive, if it's allowed at all. Text is phrased to imply that the default for this should be "no".

Suffice it to say, there is no RAW method to guarantee a monk has any casting not specifically done by him. In order for you to buy a divine power, the DM must first: Provide you with access to a caster capable of casting it. Then: allow his divine gifts to be sold. There is no rule to say that every service should be available in every town. The closest you find is a general guideline for DM's to use to estimate what services are within reason to be in a town, based on its size. Note this is a guideline, not a rule.

Tell you what. Build a monk 10, I'll build a rogue 10. Use what you like, as shall I. Let's see what wins. I'll build mine through coyote code and keep it hidden until after yours is posted. PM solo your build, as shall I, to keep it double blind. I'll randomly select a map using the Arena maps in the Arena combat thread, and we'll go from there. Core only, PrC's allowed if you qualify, we'll see if it can keep up. My money's on "no".

EDIT: Is it sad that I found the conversation about races that are "Poopless" more interesting?

[Kurald Galain]

I have to admit that the "non-Monkness" argument concerning the Giamonk has always confused me.

Apart from the fluff part of the argument, there's also the crunch part that the Gonk is simply not using his monk abilities.

But aside from that, there's still the other arguments that (1) every single class with UMD on their skill list does it better, and yes that includes the Expert; (2) the build is unplayable until it reaches the (rather high) level where it can use UMD reliably; (3) the build is unplayable in a campaign (as opposed to a one-off adventure), because you spend too much money on consumables; (4) the build doesn't work unless you get sufficient buff time at the beginning of combat; (5) dispel magic or greater dispel magic shuts it down hard; (6) the build relies heavily on polymorph, and if you don't realize that polymorph is broken you haven't been paying attention; and (7) every other PC class has better synergy with polymorph than the monk does.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

One suggestion. As this is a one-off, use the variant rules in the DMG for one-offs. Specifically, that all consumable magic items are 5x the value. This is to simulate the fact that a potion of CLW is suddenly as useful as a widget of CLW once per day. I think that would help keep the balance closer to what it would be in actual play.

[Skjaldbakka]

Actually, his argument is that the monk A) has the capacity to UMD to acquire buff spells on self, and B) due to the monk's class features, is uniquely suited to derive the most benefit from those buffs.

I don't necessarily agree with his argument, but misrepresenting your opponent is in bad form.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

2. Monk builds and arguments are also based on UMD. Now the "monk-suckage" fraction goes through the roof. "What are you thinking, Gia? Using a cross-class skill? That is not showing the strength of a class, it's a weakness. Do that without UMD. Or my expert with maxed UMD stomps your monk to death in morphed form" (ah, the hilarity of it...)
"And while you're at it, please no partially charged wands" (although it's RAW)", because otherwise scrolls would make no sense" (they do, but only for low-level spellcasters able to take the scribe scroll feat, and for spells of level 5-9).

3. Then some monk builds are posted using rings of spell storing and npc spellcasting buffs. Again uproar. "How could you! Using wealth for an (even meant to be ascetic) monk to make your point? And where again are the spells for the ring coming from? And what makes you even think you can buy everything you need?" (er...the rules?) "Well, you can be sure that no cleric of mine would ever help you."
Shy suggestions of mine, that you could use different methods are similarly shot down, although they are all RAW:
- using leadership for free spellcasting cohorts ("broken")
- using diplomacy to get cheaper npc spellcasting ("broken" - funny thinking about this, since you can easily gain big wealth through the skills crafting, sleight-of-hand, forgery etc.-, and "adventures almost never are in/near cities")
- using pearls of power ("you're using up all of your wealth, where you SHOULD buy that important staff+3 to keep you sucking".)

This is just a series of lies and misrepresentations that shows your biased nature. I do not concern myself with some mythical duel of the ages (and the eversmoking bottle can be a good tactic 1vs1 since you don't have to worry about crippling allies and waiting out your own casters buffs.)

Polymorph is pretty clearly broken, so much so that WotC even realized it. Wildshape is extremely powerful, but the fact that it is self only on someone who has 2/3rds BAB and isn't going be casting Divine Power, not to mention misses out on the most important forms makes it less then an issue in my mind. It's really just the Triumvirate of class abilities that makes Druids so incredible. And we know that specializing is better then Generality in D&D, so Druids who are Second at everything (well in Core-probably the best melee damage) are in fact incredibly powerful, but not more so then Wizards or Clerics really. Just easier at reaching that power level.

That aside, what I have quoted above is a series of horrible misrepresentations and lies that I do not appreciate being thrown around:

1) No one has claimed that an Expert would Morph and beat upon a Monk, though they could if the Monk is not similarly morphed or comparably buffed. The only thing claimed is that a class with UMD as a class skill is superior at UMDing then one without it. And as far as I can tell, no one has claimed that using UMD is a weakness, just that it highlights the fact that a Monk is weaker then a Fighter or Barbarian, who can beat him if he doesn't use UMD.

2) your example (3) came before example (2). You started without UMD, and slowly as you were presented with challenges for the Monk had to rely more and more on UMD.

3) No one claimed that their Clerics would not help you, that is just you lying to attempt to portray other posters in a negative light.

4) No one claimed you shouldn't use Wealth, only that you do not have the Wealth to do all the things you claim, and that you should demonstrate why the Monk doing these things with wealth is significantly better then another character of any class. Something which you have yet to do to my satisfaction, (admittedly you are often distracted by a torrent of posts addressing several issues.)

5) No one has claimed that you can't buy Pearls of Power, just that these things have a cost, and as things stand, many people, myself included do not think you have the WBL to buy all the things you claim, and that further, with a Build so based on expendables (yes this part has nothing to do with Pearls of Power) you would not have anywhere near the Wealth of the other characters, having expended so much of it already.

6) Partially charged wands: Your assumptions about town wealth and item availability would indicate that every single town has as many level 1 wands with 1 charge left as you need. Note that the cost of buying such a wand if it existed would be 15gp, compared to crafting a scroll which costs 12.5gp and 1XP. So are you telling me that you think it takes a feat to obtain an ability that allows you to spend 8 hours to create something you could have got for 2.5 gold more in any town? As per any possible evaluation system in D&D (like the purchasing spellcasting section) 1XP is worth considerably more then 2.5 GP. This is a ridiculous assumption both for any realistic world and for any kind of coherent rules set to exist.

You claim Core is balanced. With Partially charged wands it seems clear that it makes no sense. So you can either admit that the rules are "balanced" but also crazy, retarded, and non-sensible, or you can attempt to prove the balance of Core without appealing to Partially charged wands that exist (1 for every single first level spell) in every single town.

7) No one here is advocating Sleight of Hand or Forgery cheese though. And I'm sure all of them would decry any method of using skills to exceed WBL. Since all them have the same effect, which is to make all Balance moot. Using Diplomacy to get cheaper spellcasting to exceed WBL is just as bad as the Rogue that thinks he can steal enough to buy a +5 Vorpal Sword at level 1.

[Skjaldbakka]

Buying partially charged wands is a houserule, not RAW. If that is not the case, then by all means post a link that says you can buy partially charged wands. They can only be purchased if the DM lets you. While this is true of all items, there is no listed price or method for creating or buying partially charged wands.

I houserule that 25c. wands can be made at 50% cost.

[Citizen Jenkins]

On the concept on "Monkness". Solo, I don't understand what you're point is? Yes, other classes have those options but Monks have access to UMD. Having it as an option alone does not mean that's what the designers had in mind when they designed the game or the common archetype. Nor did this come up when you argued that monks should resemble the wuxia archetype, you used examples from fiction. The more appropriate response would have been to draw examples from fiction and designer notes. Either rules mean it's appropriate for the class, in which case UMD is okay for monks, or rules don't, in which case monks using UMD is hardly the most egregious example on these boards.

Nor is is there (or should there be) much argument that many classes in practice differ from both their designers intent or their appearance in popular media. First, it is agreed (by my understanding), that much of the imbalance in 3.5 arose not only because the testers inadequately tested the system but that they assumed players would play in certain ways. Wizards would launch fireballs, fighters would charge in sword&board style, rogues would sneak attack, and clerics would heal most of the time. They balanced the system around these assumptions, playtested the system using this model, and thus created many of the current imbalances. Certainly Clerics and Druids were powered up since they'd been healbots in 2nd but the designers never thought they would dominate close combat as they do now which is why many of the most powerful spells snuck through. So certainly many, if not all of the classes, uses features the designers included as options but were never properly playtested because the designers simply didn't consider their use likely or widespread.
As regards to fiction, D&D is an entirely separate beast. Suffice to say that in literature clerics do not often outfight fighters, the wise men of the woods cannot transform into dinosaurs, a wizard's familiar does not commonly cast spells, rogues do not carry around a sack of scrolls, housecats do not menace the general population, small humanoid lizards do not easily attain godhood, and samurai fight well. Let's face it, trying to limit D&D characters by these standards is hopeless. However, even if we try, given the sheer diversity, where the heck to we draw the line? Really, given modern cinema (ranging from Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon to the dreaded Dragon Ball Z), high level monks should be able to do things only replicable by magic and magic items. No matter what a monk does, some book, legend, or TV show will justify it.

I can understand critiquing the Giamonk on mechanical grounds but to do it on some sort of fluff grounds is just silly. D&D fluff has always been a horrendous hodgepodge of various influences, the rules rarely match any of those sources, and the only thing more ridiculous than holding the monk to these standards is demanding that the monk holds to them while allowing wizards, druids, and the like a free pass.




No. Time to fight the permanently invisible, flying weightless Polymorphed Will O'Wisp Expert w/ smoking bottle and then argue about how Expert is a viable PC class.

I'm going to presume this is a joke. Disregarding the minute duration, the abysmal strength score, etc; as a general rule whenever I am dependent on magic items for my power I will make sure I polymorph into something with hands.

Chosen: You're making an argument I'm trying to avoid here because I don't think it is pertinent. Irregardless of how effective an Expert might be, he'll sit back and use his scrolls at range, close combat is just not one of his better options. For a Monk or the like, close combat buffs mesh well with how his class is constructed and so those classes using UMD will focus on the buffs due to cost and effectiveness. These aren't interchangable and unless you're honestly telling me that UMD Experts usually Polymorph/buff and charge in close combat then I don't see where this argument is relevant. How the effectiveness of these tactics compare is a different debate; I'm trying to get agreement that these two builds use different strategies.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

EDIT: Is it sad that I found the conversation about races that are "Poopless" more interesting?

No it is not! My Witty comments about undead are the second best part of this thread! (Everything Solo says is first.)

@Gia, and as for your definition of a Gia Monk "A Monk who uses his magic items effectively in conjunction with his class abilities." don't kid yourself. All Characters, Monks inclusive, should use their WBL and magic items effectively. You can't name the idea after yourself.

A Gia Monk to me is one that uses UMD, since UMD is not a class skill, this is not the norm for Monks.

I'm not going to Claim that a "ChosenWizard" is a Wizard that uses his spells effectively in combination with his WBL and feats. That's all Wizards that are still alive.

I might claim that a ChosenWizard is one who is excessively protective of his ability to cast spells (for an example see my item lists here (http://www.roguepenguin.com/castellar/profiler/view.php?id=1997))

Of course, that's only level 6, for a true example, this (http://www.roguepenguin.com/castellar/profiler/view.php?id=2018) character (the same character at level 12) will really show how incredibly paranoid I can be. It has a lot more WBL to play around with, and can cast the spells he needs so that they last all day.

[Dode]

On the concept on "Monkness". Solo, I don't understand what you're point is? Yes, other classes have those options but Monks have access to UMD.Other classes have those options and access to UMD. Often far more access to UMD then the Monk.

[Kurald Galain]

I can understand critiquing the Giamonk on mechanical grounds but to do it on some sort of fluff grounds is just silly.
Well, it is a good thing then that we are critiquing the gonk on mechanical grounds. I'm afraid that turns your post into a bit of a straw man.

[Skjaldbakka]

I'm not going to Claim that a "ChosenWizard" is a Wizard that uses his spells effectively in combination with his WBL and feats. That's all Wizards that are still alive.

Actually, a wizard can typically get away with using his WBL in a haphazard or even random manner, so long as he maintains a good spell selection, and keeps enough money aside for spell components, and perhaps a spare spellbook.

[Kurald Galain]

Irregardless of how effective an Expert might be, he'll sit back and use his scrolls at range, close combat is just not one of his better options. For a Monk or the like, close combat buffs mesh well with how his class is constructed and so those classes using UMD will focus on the buffs due to cost and effectiveness.

Irregardless is not a word. [ /pedant]

The problem is that yes, a polymorphed Expert fights in close combat about as well as a polymorphed Monk does (same BAB, similar weapon choice, only one hit point per level less, both have sufficient feats since there aren't all that many necessary feats, and both can use the natural attack routine which is better than the flurry anyway).

This is because, as a plethora of threads on this and other forums point out, a monk really isn't all that good at combat, and because the cheese that is polymorph completely overshadows the combat ability of either. But, this is made somewhat irrelevant by the fact that, for any character relying (almost) solely on UMD, close combat really isn't so good a strategy.

[Skjaldbakka]

I've seen some pretty buff melee rogues and even bards that take advantage of UMD.

[Kurald Galain]

I've seen some pretty buff melee rogues and even bards that take advantage of UMD.

Well, rogues have better melee abilities than monks do, and have UMD as a class skill. So if we're comparing "melee UMD'ers", the rogue beats the monk on both counts.

[emeraldstreak]

Buying partially charged wands is a houserule, not RAW.

MIC has RAW on the matter.

[Dode]

24-page thread summarized:

No.

[Chosen_of_Vecna]

Actually, a wizard can typically get away with using his WBL in a haphazard or even random manner, so long as he maintains a good spell selection, and keeps enough money aside for spell components, and perhaps a spare spellbook.

True, but it was making a point. Besides, Gia would just assert that Wizards do need to use their WBL effectively because of all the rogues that sneak in the night, nab your spellbook and shout in your ear to disrupt your rest.

Nevermind, Familiars keeping watch, other party members, alarm spells, ect.

Of course the more I think about it, the more I do want super redundant spell access to become my Trademark. Chosen Wizard isn't all that good a name, can anyone think of a better one that still might allow me to claim it as my own?

It almost makes me want to write a Guide like Solo's, but for Wizards, and not about being effective (TLN and Treatmont have that covered.) but about redundant spell access.

[Nebo_]

MIC has RAW on the matter.
I'm getting sick of you doing that. When you make a claim, please back it up. Give us a page reference, a quote, anything.

[Skjaldbakka]

MIC has RAW on the matter.

Perhaps, but MiC is not Core. Also, given your reliability in this thread, I'm not inclined to take your word for it w/o a quote from MiC that explicitly states that you can buy a wand with a number of charges of your choice. Actually, what can be purchased isn't even the issue. The issue is whether they can be made that way, because if they can't you are relying on the random chance that you will find a used wand of the spell you need at the number of charges you want.

[Talic]

True, but it was making a point. Besides, Gia would just assert that Wizards do need to use their WBL effectively because of all the rogues that sneak in the night, nab your spellbook and shout in your ear to disrupt your rest.

Nevermind, Familiars keeping watch, other party members, alarm spells, ect.

Of course the more I think about it, the more I do want super redundant spell access to become my Trademark. Chosen Wizard isn't all that good a name, can anyone think of a better one that still might allow me to claim it as my own?

It almost makes me want to write a Guide like Solo's, but for Wizards, and not about being effective (TLN and Treatmont have that covered.) but about redundant spell access.

In Soviet Russia, CVizard shouts in rogue's ear!

[emeraldstreak]

...the ability to not provoke from your movement through your target's reach, if he has reach. Which is why I went for spring attack.


...tumble + 60 feet move?

Anyhow, if you want to burn 3 feats, I'm not going to stop you.

[Talic]

...tumble + 60 feet move?

Anyhow, if you want to burn 3 feats, I'm not going to stop you.

tumble knocks 33% off your move. And still, you're trading hits, which is a losing proposition against most monsters. Though, admittedly, you slow it's damage potential, or allow it to focus on other party members.

1 hit a round by a monk will not lay a giant or a dire animal low any time soon.

Further, Ready action: grapple, or ready action: Awesome blow work really well for many big beasties to stop such tactics.

EDIT: Or, if the animal has improved grab, Ready action: "beat monk in the face."

[emeraldstreak]

Perhaps, but MiC is not Core.

Time to learn RAW is not necessarily Core then.

[Talic]

Time to learn RAW is not necessarily Core then.

It is in a core only discussion.

Unless you want to go outside core. Then I get to use Lion totem barbarian and flaws when I make comparative arguements.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Time to learn RAW is not necessarily Core then.It's a debate involving Giacomo. Check all non-core books at the door.

[Dode]

Emeraldstreak If We Have Learned One Thing, For The Love Of God, Is Not To Bring Non-core Stuff In Defense Of The Monk

Because if you do, that means everyone else can start bringing in non-core stuff for everyone else. You think CoDzilla is bad now? Just hand 'em the Spell Compendium. You think those armed melee classes are tough to compete with now? Have some MIC.

[Skjaldbakka]

...tumble + 60 feet move?

Anyhow, if you want to burn 3 feats, I'm not going to stop you.


Similarly, I'm not going to stop you from taking Weapon Focus. Taking the Spring Attack feat is actually useful some of the time, though. Also Tumble won't get you back out of melee if you fail your grapple check, which is the whole point of taking it. If I fail the grapple, I don't want to be standing there and taking their full attack after I did nothing. If they have to move up to me, they make 1 attack (unless they pounce), and then I get a full attack flurry to try and grapple. Net result- reduced damage taken before grapple manuever is initiated.

It has also been established already that monks have the feats to burn in a core only game. The feats they need they get for free, so you can do pretty mcuh whatever with the rest of your feats. Of course, fighter has that advantage in spades, but there you are.

[Talic]

Emeraldstreak If We Have Learned One Thing, For The Love Of God, Is Not To Bring Non-core Stuff In Defense Of The Monk

Because if you do, that means everyone else can start bringing in non-core stuff for everyone else. You think CoDzilla is bad now? Just hand 'em the Spell Compendium. You think those armed melee classes are tough to compete with now? Have some MIC.

Don't need. Unearthed Arcana, and Psionic Books. With that, I'll build a level 1 druid that'll take a level 2 monk.

[emeraldstreak]

I'm getting sick of you doing that. When you make a claim, please back it up. Give us a page reference, a quote, anything.

MIC is pivotal book for out-of-core. [Scrubbed]

[Skjaldbakka]

Hardly an accomplishment. Druids get an animal companion at level 1 has a good shot at taking the level 2 monk by itself. On top of that, your druid can, you know, do stuff too. That is part of the druid animal companion issue. Actions are important. Animal Companions are buff enough to matter, and give the druid's player an extra character to act with.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

MIC is pivotal book for out-of-core. {Scrubbed}Any book out of core is too large to dig through looking for a reference. If you're going to use out of core RAW, give enough backup for others to confirm it.

[Skjaldbakka]

Really, because it came out late in the game. Also, at this point, I'm not going to believe any statement you make unless you cite a supporting reference. You shot down your credibility a looong time ago.

[Reel On, Love]

MIC is pivotal book for out-of-core. {Scrubbed}

I'm familiar with the MIC, thanks. That doesn't mean I can automatically know where every single line is.

Stop calling people noobs.
Start backing up what you say. The MIC does NOT say that you can buy wands with any number of charges, and if you're going to insist that it does, PROVE IT. Page and quote.

[Skjaldbakka]

You see, Reel On, Love has not shot his credibility to hell and gone by repeatedly making groundless and unsupported assertions, and he has also not continously taken a stance of 'oh you newbs bow down to the supreme rightness that is everything I say, because I said it'.

The only thing you can do on an internet forum to establish credibility and authority when you make a statement is to consistently establish a tendency to be correct. To do that, you have to use good debate tactics, and cite your freakin' sources. We don't know you, we only know the words you have written on the forums. They don't speak well of you so far.

[Talic]

Hardly an accomplishment. Druids get an animal companion at level 1 has a good shot at taking the level 2 monk by itself. On top of that, your druid can, you know, do stuff too. That is part of the druid animal companion issue. Actions are important. Animal Companions are buff enough to matter, and give the druid's player an extra character to act with.

I'd be using an ability that gives up animal companion.

Oh, and citing sources isn't assuming that your opponent won't know it. It's to give credibility to your case by making your statements backed by concrete knowledge. It's why any solid debate requires it, any direct claim has it. If you have the information, it keeps everything moving faster, and allows for easier clarification, to show your proof.

It also shows that you're not lazy, and using insults to cover your lack of willingness to cite the source.

[Skjaldbakka]

Ah, giving the monk a sporting chance, eh?

edit- never really played with elemental companion before myself. I prefer the PHBII druid variants. I usually take the whole batch, as I don't like summoning, as I feel it bogs down combat.

[Talic]

Ah, giving the monk a sporting chance, eh?

Swap for elemental companion. 100 foot movement air elemental shoots that whole "opportunistic fighter" junk all to heck. Follow up with a high strength build with the quick trait, speed of thought, and longstrider, and you move 60 as well, for a solid hour (50 all other times).

After that, creative purchases from non-MIC sources gives the dr00d an easy win every time. It would be the 3rd link in my Arena spoiler in my sig.

[Skjaldbakka]

So, a question for the monk supporters. When you are running a 4 man party with a monk, what role does it take? Is it supposed to take over the frontliner spot, the skillmonkey spot, the arcanist spot, or the healer spot?

I suppose if you have a druid for the healer, his animal companion could take the frontliner spot, and then the monk is free to play 5th wheel.

[lord_khaine]

This is because, as a plethora of threads on this and other forums point out, a monk really isn't all that good at combat, and because the cheese that is polymorph completely overshadows the combat ability of either
a lot of other threads has claimed that, nothing has been proven so far.


Swap for elemental companion. 100 foot movement air elemental shoots that whole "opportunistic fighter" junk all to heck. Follow up with a high strength build with the quick trait, speed of thought, and longstrider, and you move 60 as well, for a solid hour (50 all other times).

After that, creative purchases from non-MIC sources gives the dr00d an easy win every time. It would be the 3rd link in my Arena spoiler in my sig.

so the point is the monk isnt any good, because a druid using alternative traits and items can beat him :smallconfused:

and for that matter, i cant see how a elemental companion can either make "opportunistic fighter" junk, or for that matter shoot it to heck.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

So, a question for the monk supporters. When you are running a 4 man party with a monk, what role does it take? Is it supposed to take over the frontliner spot, the skillmonkey spot, the arcanist spot, or the healer spot?

I suppose if you have a druid for the healer, his animal companion could take the frontliner spot, and then the monk is free to play 5th wheel.According to earlier posts, it's a skillmonkey without trapfinding or a useful number of skillpoints.

[Skjaldbakka]

-Lord Khaine, I think you must have missed the part where the druid with out of core stuff was a response to emeraldstreaks insistence on using out of core stuff to support the monk. It was a demonstration of how out of core stuff supports other classes better than it does the monk.

-So I suppose the spellcasters are supposed to pick up the trapfinding slack with their spells, eh? Or perhaps the monk is UMDing detect traps as well? I think they are trying to claim monk as a frontliner, myself. To be fair, we ought to let the pro-monk side tell us what role the monk takes in a 4-man party, and not make assumptions ourselves. We are biased against the monk after all.

edit- and, end of shift. Hopefully this thread won't spiral into a flamestorm and be locked by the time I get back.

[lord_khaine]

So, a question for the monk supporters. When you are running a 4 man party with a monk, what role does it take? Is it supposed to take over the frontliner spot, the skillmonkey spot, the arcanist spot, or the healer spot?


well since the healer classes is also funny enough the best frontliners, and the only spots thats really nececary is the arcanist one, then i usualy takes a mix of frontlining, skilling and skirmishing.

the role of "frontlining" i have allready defendet several times, and a human without int penalty would have 5 sp per level, enough for some selective skilling.
skirmishing comes from a mix of good speed and tumble.

[Talic]

a lot of other threads has claimed that, nothing has been proven so far.



so the point is the monk isnt any good, because a druid using alternative traits and items can beat him :smallconfused:

and for that matter, i cant see how a elemental companion can either make "opportunistic fighter" junk, or for that matter shoot it to heck.

I'm not saying monk isn't any good. It's about 60%. Other non-caster classes are 70%. Caster classes are about 110%.

Not that it's no good. Just less good. And less supported by out of core stuff. Now, if that line of reasoning is dead, over with, and shown to be true, let's move back to the core only discussion. Other classes win out of core incredibly easily.

[lord_khaine]

-Lord Khaine, I think you must have missed the part where the druid with out of core stuff was a response to emeraldstreaks insistence on using out of core stuff to support the monk. It was a demonstration of how out of core stuff supports other classes better than it does the monk.

well the problem with using out of core stuff is more that it then becomes a contest of who is best at digging though the mountain of stuff published to find things that support the argument you favor.


According to earlier posts, it's a skillmonkey without trapfinding or a useful number of skillpoints.


-So I suppose the spellcasters are supposed to pick up the trapfinding slack with their spells, eh? Or perhaps the monk is UMDing detect traps as well? I think they are trying to claim monk as a frontliner, myself. To be fair, we ought to let the pro-monk side tell us what role the monk takes in a 4-man party, and not make assumptions ourselves. We are biased against the monk after all.


in those cases where trapfinding is nececary, then it has been my experience that the combination of a little detect magic and good touch ac, evasion and saves are enough to handle the traps.

[Talic]

well since the healer classes is also funny enough the best frontliners, and the only spots thats really nececary is the arcanist one, then i usualy takes a mix of frontlining, skilling and skirmishing.

the role of "frontlining" i have allready defendet several times, and a human without int penalty would have 5 sp per level, enough for some selective skilling.
skirmishing comes from a mix of good speed and tumble.

Monks can only frontline things that don't need frontlining. They can't skill well enough to replace the rogue, only be a 2nd rate substitute.

In fact, they're doing everything above "almost" as well as the class normally used to do it. But they can only do 1 well, and one "kinda ok".

So, what do you eliminate from the group? Trap finding Rogue? Melee combatant? Cleric/Druid? Wizard/Sorceror? Which one does the Monk replace well enough to do without?

[lord_khaine]

I'm not saying monk isn't any good. It's about 60%. Other non-caster classes are 70%. Caster classes are about 110%

and im saying monks are 70 +/- 5%


Monks can only frontline things that don't need frontlining. They can't skill well enough to replace the rogue, only be a 2nd rate substitute.

In fact, they're doing everything above "almost" as well as the class normally used to do it. But they can only do 1 well, and one poorly.

well thats the thing i disagree with, i firmly belive monks can frontline as well as other non-casters, and that their skills there even up whatever slack there might be in the skill department.


So, what do you eliminate from the group? Trap finding Rogue? Melee combatant? Cleric/Druid? Wizard/Sorceror? Which one does the Monk replace well enough to do without?

rogue/melee combatant.

[Talic]

well the problem with using out of core stuff is more that it then becomes a contest of who is best at digging though the mountain of stuff published to find things that support the argument you favor.
For monks, maybe. Most classes don't require that much digging.

in those cases where trapfinding is nececary, then it has been my experience that the combination of a little detect magic and good touch ac, evasion and saves are enough to handle the traps.
If you can get by without it, it's not really "necessary", then.

And what you're saying is, you shunt the majority of the trap finding off on the casters, and intend to defeat the traps by wandering blithely into them and trusting on decent rolls to save you? Not buying it.

[lord_khaine]

For monks, maybe. Most classes don't require that much digging
i would like to challenge that claim, but i dont have enough books to dig though myself.


If you can get by without it, it's not really "necessary", then.

And what you're saying is, you shunt the majority of the trap finding off on the casters, and intend to defeat the traps by wandering blithely into them and trusting on decent rolls to save you? Not buying it.

no im saying that i shunt the minority of trapfinding off to the casters, and defeat most traps by walking into them.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

in those cases where trapfinding is nececary, then it has been my experience that the combination of a little detect magic and good touch ac, evasion and saves are enough to handle the traps.Play Tomb of Horrors sometime. That'll learn you respect for traps.

[Talic]

and im saying monks are 70 - 5%


well thats the thing i disagree with, i firmly belive monks can frontline as well as other non-casters, and that their skills there even up whatever slack there might be in the skill department.

edited first portion to make it closer to accurate.

2nd is beyond my editing ability, as it's clearly disadvantaged in the damage category and the ability to hit category, and the HP category. It may have AC, but how does that get enemies to pay attention to it? Why not just ignore the monk's paltry bit of damage?

If we're getting rid of the rogue for it, then we lose out on trapfinding, and sneak attack (which is a bit better on damage than monk IUA damage). If we get rid of the frontline, casters now need to take over the damage role, as the monk's somewhat challenged there.

[The Rose Dragon]

no im saying that i shunt the minority of trapfinding off to the casters, and defeat most traps by walking into them.

And if the traps you walk into reset automatically? Like, you know, most respectable traps do?

[Kurald Galain]

and im saying monks are 70 +/- 5%

Well, see, the funny thing is that you're arguing from opinion, whereas Talic and Real On are arguing from fact. The funny thing about facts is that even if you don't like them, they remain as factual as ever.

[lord_khaine]

Play Tomb of Horrors sometime. That'll learn you respect for traps
as i understand the only way to win Tomb of horrors is not to win, so no thnx.


Originally Posted by lord_khaine
and im saying monks are 70 - 5%


well thats the thing i disagree with, i firmly belive monks can frontline as well as other non-casters, and that their skills there even up whatever slack there might be in the skill department.

edited first portion to make it closer to accurate.

if you are going to quote things i write, then at least do me the favor of getting it accurate.
i said 70 +/-5%, meaning there were a variation on the final result.


2nd is beyond my editing ability, as it's clearly disadvantaged in the damage category and the ability to hit category, and the HP category. It may have AC, but how does that get enemies to pay attention to it? Why not just ignore the monk's paltry bit of damage?

If we're getting rid of the rogue for it, then we lose out on trapfinding, and sneak attack (which is a bit better on damage than monk IUA damage). If we get rid of the frontline, casters now need to take over the damage role, as the monk's somewhat challenged there.
the usual way to make people pay attention to you is either to move up in front of them and start hitting them, or to use a combination of trip/stun and grapple to slow them down.
also the monk isnt as bad off in the damage catagory as you claim, and may in the long run do more damage because it spend less time dealing with the consequenses of a failed will/ref save.

as for the rogue part, yes there might not be the usual kind of trapfinding, but just triggering the traps has allways served me well, as for sneak attack, yes it does a lot of damage, but there are both the trouble of setting it up, as well as the opponents immune to it.
not to mention melee combat can be a unhealthy place for rogues.


And if the traps you walk into reset automatically? Like, you know, most respectable traps do?
then you still know where it is and should be able to get past it.

[Nebo_]

MIC is pivotal book for out-of-core. The fact that anti-monkers here don't know it is yet another proof how inexperienced they are in class balance.

I own the MIC, I wasn't disputing that it's a useful book. In fact, I use it a lot. I was remarking on your uncanny ability to say things with no context whatsoever. You have no right to call into question, people's ability to optimise or their knowledge of the system without any proof. It reflects very badly on you.


I'm familiar with the MIC, thanks. That doesn't mean I can automatically know where every single line is.

Stop calling people noobs.
Start backing up what you say. The MIC does NOT say that you can buy wands with any number of charges, and if you're going to insist that it does, PROVE IT. Page and quote.

Thank you, Ro,L for getting to him before I did. I would like to echo your request. Where does it say in the MIC that you can get partially filled wands?

[Kurald Galain]

Thank you, Ro,L for getting to him before I did. I would like to echo your request. Where does it say in the MIC that you can get partially filled wands?

On page 42.

But only in Emerald's version of the book, and written in red crayon. :smalltongue:

[Talic]

i would like to challenge that claim, but i dont have enough books to dig though myself.

Convenient. :) I'll try to find a way around that.

[Talic]

if you are going to quote things i write, then at least do me the favor of getting it accurate.
i said 70 +/-5%, meaning there were a variation on the final result.

And we're saying that those numbers are skewed high.


the usual way to make people pay attention to you is either to move up in front of them and start hitting them, or to use a combination of trip/stun and grapple to slow them down.

Hm. 15 damage vs 50? trip - fail, stun - fail, vs most CR appropriate foes. Large size, multi legs, and high forts are hallmarks of higher CR encounters.

also the monk isnt as bad off in the damage catagory as you claim, and may in the long run do more damage because it spend less time dealing with the consequenses of a failed will/ref save.
Ref saves rarely impact ability to hit things when failed, and at mid/high levels, most groups are well defended against most of the standard will saves.

as for the rogue part, yes there might not be the usual kind of trapfinding, but just triggering the traps has allways served me well, as for sneak attack, yes it does a lot of damage, but there are both the trouble of setting it up, as well as the opponents immune to it.Setting it up isn't that hard, I hear flanking works wonders. Some opponents are immune to it, and those foes are generally immune to Stunning fist also, so I'd say it balances.

not to mention melee combat can be a unhealthy place for rogues.
Which is why they can pull off sneak attack at range, luckily for them. Can monks use stunning fist at range?
Oh right.

[emeraldstreak]

Start backing up what you say. The MIC does NOT say that you can buy wands with any number of charges, and if you're going to insist that it does, PROVE IT. Page and quote.

And where exactly did I say MIC allows any number of charges for wands, champ?

[Reel On, Love]

And where exactly did I say MIC allows any number of charges for wands, champ?

Tell you what.
Why don't you just back up whatever it was you did say, implications and insinuations aside.
Heck, why don't you just back up something? It can be anything, really. Any of your statements. Someone else's statement. A truck. Whatever.

[JBento]

25 pages? TWENTY-FIVE?!?!?! Enough is enough! :smallwink: I come to you, my friends, with the answer to this question, so that this thread may end and die. Or rather, with the location of the answer.

Acquire thee that holy book dubbed On the Origin of PCs, and read intently the words of Belkar Bitterleaf, moral-less ranger, that they may enlighten you.

Even if you're not interested in the answer, acquire it anyway - for the book is a good book. And no, the Giant isn't paying me for this :smalltongue:

[emeraldstreak]

Emeraldstreak If We Have Learned One Thing, For The Love Of God, Is Not To Bring Non-core Stuff In Defense Of The Monk


I love noncore for Monk.



Because if you do, that means everyone else can start bringing in non-core stuff for everyone else. You think CoDzilla is bad now? Just hand 'em the Spell Compendium. You think those armed melee classes are tough to compete with now? Have some MIC.

You're confused.

While Giacomo and I both think monk is underestimated by the general crowd, our opinions differ.

The emeraldstreak thesis is

Monks, fighters, and barbarians are roughly equal in power both in Core and out of Core.

That's it. So if you think full caster > monk, that's fine by me.

[Illiterate Scribe]

And where exactly did I say MIC allows any number of charges for wands, champ?

So what did you mean here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4105534&postcount=700)?

[emeraldstreak]

Tell you what.
Why don't you just back up whatever it was you did say, implications and insinuations aside.
Heck, why don't you just back up something? It can be anything, really. Any of your statements. Someone else's statement. A truck. Whatever.

{Scrubbed}

[Illiterate Scribe]

{Scrubbed}

OK. Pretend we're all complete idiots, who have no sense at all.

What are you insinuating?

Seriously, the suspense is killing me.

[Solo]

ou are discussing in this thread about a monk's usefulness and you maintain you have no idea about how grapple rules work?
Well, you talk about how monks are balanced against spellcasters... yet have no idea how many spells work.

Didn't I have to correct you on how Alter Self worked in a previous thread? You forgot about the 5 HD limit, and the fact that Alter Self only gave you certain physical benefits.

(And haven't we corrected you about your misconceptions on spells in this thread too?)

Yet I never claimed how, just because you got the details of that thread wrong, you were manipulating things.

It goes both ways.



, I don't understand what you're point is? Yes, other classes have those options but Monks have access to UMD. Having it as an option alone does not mean that's what the designers had in mind when they designed the game or the common archetype. Nor did this come up when you argued that monks should resemble the wuxia archetype, you used examples from fiction. The more appropriate response would have been to draw examples from fiction and designer notes. Either rules mean it's appropriate for the class, in which case UMD is okay for monks, or rules don't, in which case monks using UMD is hardly the most egregious example on these boards.

*Sigh*

1. UMD is cross class. The monk has to spend a lot of resources to get it to a useable state.
2. In 3.0, you couldn't even put ranks into cross class skills. Consider that and its implications.

MIC is pivotal book for out-of-core. {Scrubbed}

*rolls eyes*

Some of us are poor college students who can't afford it, but seeing as how you're so bent on us knowing this sort of thing, perhaps you can buy a copy for me? I'd get a pirated PDF myself, but that's kinda hard to do. Perhaps you can supply me with one of those instead, if you can't afford to buy me a copy?

In the meantime, would you please quote the relevant portion of the MIC so that we may be enlightened by it?

After all, we'll be needing proof, not just your word for it, right?



MIC has RAW on the matter.

Ok! Now what is it?