PDA

View Full Version : Query: Do Monks benefit more from magic items?



Frosty
2008-03-30, 03:02 PM
In 3rd edition, most everybody is fairly dependent on WBL and magic items to be competitive at higher levels. Lately, I've been in a fairly low-wealth game. We're level 11 with about level 5 or 6-is wealth. We're having a bit of trouble sometimes but then we're also fighting slightly weaker enemies so we're not getting slaughtered. that got me thinking about how much we need items.

Then, wile reading a monk thread, I was thinking about how Monks could be somewhat competitive with a decent expenditure of items and consumables, which is great. But, so can other classes. Does the Monk get so much more out of items and consumables that he equals or exceeds the other classes? And also, with all the discussion about items, would the Monk get screwed more than the majority of other classes if he did not have any consumables or items? What should a monk do if he finds himself in low-wealth game where the party composition does not include a wizard to give him some of the buffs, and rings of spell-storing are just too expensive? If 1000 gold is al you've gotten thru adventuring and you're still using 5th-level gear even though you're level 11, how would a monk change his strategy?

I personally think all non-casters are fairly screwed in a low-wealth environment, but is the Monk just worse off than others? It would make sense *if* the Monk gains more benefit from having items.

Assume two circumstances. One is Core. other is non-Core.

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 03:29 PM
Typically, they do, if you consider their need for magic items to cover the weaknesses of their class abilities 'benefitting more'.

Some, like Gia, would advocate that of course they do, for there are less restrictions involved. A polymorphed Monk, for example, would still have Wisdom to AC, Stunning Fist, Unarmed Strike, etc, whereas a Fighter may have to be more 'creative' to fit the new form.

Whether or not this is true for the majority of magic items is still moot.

Chronos
2008-03-30, 03:33 PM
It depends on the magic item. A monk won't gain much benefit at all from a greatsword +5, but he will gain more from an Amulet of Mighty Fists.

If you truly have no wealth whatsoever, a monk will do better than the other melee types, but that's about the only situation where the monk will be better. If you have insanely high wealth, the monk will be almost as good as the fighter, but that's only because the classes themselves become insignificant compared to the items.

Solo
2008-03-30, 03:37 PM
Magic items improve upon monks because there is so much room for improvement.

Frosty
2008-03-30, 03:39 PM
But is wealth by level enough for a monk to be about equally as effective as other scout/assassin/infiltrator types? At higher levels I seem to think so, but what about lower levels?

Spiryt
2008-03-30, 03:40 PM
If you truly have no wealth whatsoever, a monk will do better than the other melee types, but that's about the only situation where the monk will be better.

Can I ask why? :smallconfused:

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 03:44 PM
Can I ask why? :smallconfused:

No wealth=No Weapons/Armor. Which is fair game for the Monk to kick ass, for a change.

As to Frosty's question, pretty much no. It's far more natural for a rogue or a ranger to fill those archetypes, because it falls directly with their class abilities and skill slots. The monk can attempt a parody with magic items, but bear in mind that any magic item that aids the monk in being a scout,assassin, or infiltrator can likewise be used to aid rogues/rangers/(Insert Stealthy class).

So while a monk can be passable in those types, he cannot excel, even less so with lower WBL.

Frosty
2008-03-30, 03:48 PM
So you are saying a Monk's class abilities make him a worse infiltrators than a Rogue or a Ranger? Would he be on par if he got 8 + int skills a level?

Solo
2008-03-30, 03:50 PM
So you are saying a Monk's class abilities make him a worse infiltrators than a Rogue or a Ranger?

Well, they don't really support infiltration...

Kurald Galain
2008-03-30, 03:51 PM
But is wealth by level enough for a monk to be about equally as effective as other scout/assassin/infiltrator types?

No, because the scout/assassin/infiltrator types can buy the very same items, and start ahead. For instance, a monk with a hat of disguise is still behind a rogue with the disguise skill and a hat of disguise.

The answer to your question is somewhat tricky, as several magical items are restricted to certain classes. The class that benefits from the most magical items, is therefore the one with the most items available to him - this is probably the warlock (by design intent) although anything with UMD on their class list qualifies.

But "benefitting from the most" is not the same as "the most benefitting". For that, I'd have to agree with Solo. Specifically, the difference between two one-digit numbers becomes less pronounced if you add a big number to both. Say monk = 2, Barbarian = 6, and magical items = 20. 2:6 is a bigger percentual difference than 22:26.

Spiryt
2008-03-30, 03:52 PM
No wealth=No Weapons/Armor. Which is fair game for the Monk to kick ass, for a change.



This is kinda literall treating...

Well, considering that ranger or even barbarian managed to steal some completely basic weapons e.c. - nothing magic, they just can effective use power attack and other feats, and generally fight with their abilities and spells.

Are their still worse than monk on high levels?

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 03:53 PM
Yes, I am, actually. The rogue, as an infiltrator, has Disguise as a class skill, whereas the Monk does not. Both Rogue and Ranger have more skill points, allowing more ranks in 'sneaky' abilities. Rogues are often Int-centered as well, making them quite adept, if not perfect for the job.

Frankly, even 6+Int to Monk would be a thankful increase. It would put him nearly on-par, scoutwise, with the Ranger.

Let's not forget ethical restrictions, either. Monks have that issue of needing to stay lawful.

Frosty
2008-03-30, 03:54 PM
Well, they don't really support infiltration...

Well, I kind of like Dimension Door...although I wish it's more than 1/day.

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 03:57 PM
Well, I kind of like Dimension Door...although I wish it's more than 1/day.

Be a caster. Kidding.

While yes, a monk may be more mobile in terms of raw speed, there are other ways to achieve that "High-Tail it out of here" necessity.

holywhippet
2008-03-30, 04:01 PM
You can compensate for a lack of magical items by giving your character a level in sorcerer and/or a level in cleric (you could include druid as well). This gives the monk access to spells like shield, mage armour, shield of faith etc.

The thing is, a monk is not meant to be a front line fighter. Their role is battlefield support and a certain amount of stealth while off the battlefield.

Solo
2008-03-30, 04:01 PM
Well, I kind of like Dimension Door...although I wish it's more than 1/day.

Be a warlock?

Xuincherguixe
2008-03-30, 04:04 PM
Well, wisdom boosting items are better for monks than for most other classes.

But I think that it may be even more than covering their weaknesses.

It may be that just about everything they have benefits other classes too, but they can have many of the same benefits at once. And, they can reasonably use a few more magic items as they don't need weapons, and can still attack when holding something, and since they shouldn't use armor, they can wear something else.

Between boosts from levels, wisdom, and dexterity, they're probably going to be fine armor wise. So they can use some manner of shirt of something.


Not too many items exist with this in mind, but if the DM allows for reasonable facsimiles that take up other slots (which they should if a Monk is playing) they'll do much better.

How much better is a bit hard to say.

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 04:07 PM
Well, wisdom boosting items are better for monks than for most other classes.

But I think that it may be even more than covering their weaknesses.

It may be that just about everything they have benefits other classes too, but they can have many of the same benefits at once. And, they can reasonably use a few more magic items as they don't need weapons, and can still attack when holding something, and since they shouldn't use armor, they can wear something else.

Between boosts from levels, wisdom, and dexterity, they're probably going to be fine armor wise. So they can use some manner of shirt of something.


Not too many items exist with this in mind, but if the DM allows for reasonable facsimiles that take up other slots (which they should if a Monk is playing) they'll do much better.

How much better is a bit hard to say.

Magic Stat Boosts are expensive. A mere +4 to Dex (+2 Ac, +2!) is 16k.

Frosty
2008-03-30, 04:14 PM
Ok, so given standard WBL at say...level 10. How would you rate these classes in terms of Scout/Infiltrator/Assassin/general support/<optional: be of great help against casters>

Monk
Rogue
Spellthief
Ranger
Scout
Beguiler

Scale is 1-10, where 10 is "OMG why would I use anyone else for this job" and 5 is "Eh, he could do the job an acceptance percentage of the time, as in we're willing to keep him the party for that role, but I wish he were better." Anything below 5 would mean, we forgot to bring along anyone in that role and we drew straws, and he ended up with the job. Good luck to him.

Kurald Galain
2008-03-30, 04:24 PM
Something like this:

Scouting:
Monk 5 / Rogue 7 (skills) / Spellthief 5 / Ranger 9 (animal companion) / Scout 9 (that's why he's called scout) / Beguiler 7 (invis)

Infiltrator:
Monk 3 (no real abilities) / Rogue 9 (that's what rogues do) / Spellthief 7 (similar but less so) / Ranger 3 (lack of social skills) / Scout 5 / Beguiler 10 (this IS what beguilers are for)

Assassin:
Monk 5 (the basics) / Rogue 8 (sneak attack) / Spellthief 7 (sneak attack) / Ranger 8 (ranged sniping) / Scout 4 (skirmish doesn't work too well here) / Beguiler 3 (lack of damage dealing)

Support:
Monk 3 (doesn't really help others) / Rogue 7 (skills) / Spellthief 5 (spells, mostly) / Ranger 7 (healing wands) / Beguiler 8 (good buffs)

Anti-caster:
Monk 1 (are you kidding?) / Rogue 5 (UMD/stealth/sneak combo) / Spellthief 8 (that is what spellthieves ARE for) / Ranger 3 (nothing special) / Scout 3 (ditto) / Beguiler 9 (fight fire with fire, fight caster with caster)

Spiryt
2008-03-30, 04:37 PM
Something like this:

Ranger 3 (nothing special)

Well, they have nondetection, so they can at least hide in the jungle and survive :smallamused:

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 04:40 PM
Well, they have nondetection, so they can at least hide in the jungle and survive :smallamused:

That's not really anti-caster. Specially when they set the forest on fire.

Frosty
2008-03-30, 04:42 PM
To be honest, you get can damage spells with the Shadow Evocation series of spells or something, but you don't really need it. You Deep Slumber someone, and then CDG. Perfectly good way of assassination.

Spiryt
2008-03-30, 04:44 PM
That's not really anti-caster. Specially when they set the forest on fire.

That was half (or rather 1/10) serious. But anyway ranger's have also protection from energy. And tree stride.

Dode
2008-03-30, 04:47 PM
It's a matter of perspective.

Everyone can gain uber cheese powers from a wand of polymorph.
Only the monk needs uber cheese to be a viable class though.

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 04:53 PM
That was half (or rather 1/10) serious. But anyway ranger's have also protection from energy. And tree stride.

True, but only in response to anti-caster=hiding.

Damn youze casters and your pretty versatile combat options.

Chronos
2008-03-30, 04:57 PM
Yeah, when I said that the Monk is better than the others with no wealth whatsoever, I meant absolutely none. I'm not sure exactly how much wealth it takes for the others to surpass the monk, but it's probably about at the point where they get cold iron weapons (which is not very much at all).


Ok, so given standard WBL at say...level 10. How would you rate these classes in terms of Scout/Infiltrator/Assassin/general support/<optional: be of great help against casters>

Monk
Rogue
Spellthief
Ranger
Scout
BeguilerI won't break it down case-by-case, but overall, I would rank those:
Beguiler
Spellthief
Rogue
Ranger
Monk
Rogue and ranger are close; ranger is a bit better in a fight, but rogue is a bit better out of a fight. I don't have much experience with scouts, but they're probably close to that level, too. The one place where monks might have an edge is in scouting, thanks to their speed, but by the time that becomes significant, more efficient means of scouting become available, anyway. Rogues, meanwhile, have a skill for every occasion, and Beguilers and Spellthieves are like rogues, but with magic.

Giving the monk 6 or 8 skill points would certainly help, since one of the monk's problems is that he doesn't have enough skill points to do the things he really ought to be able to do. The stealth and counterstealth skills already account for all of the monk's points, assuming average intelligence (and what monk can afford to have more?), plus there's Balance, Tumble, and Jump, which any monk really ought to have, too. I'm still not sure that would be enough, though, because even with the extra skill points, a monk's only real advantage over a rogue is the move speed. And while running fifty miles an hour is nice and all, it doesn't really contribute much.

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 05:05 PM
Perhaps the monks should follow the "Combat Style" approach of the Ranger, but apply it to skills. For example, +X to Y at level Z, with the addition of more options (or improvement to already selected options) at later levels. Just for a more skill-based feel, rather than a simple 6+Int.

Funkyodor
2008-03-30, 05:19 PM
If you are in a game that does not involve Ye 'Ol Magic Emporium, which tends to theroetically sell anything & everything to anyone of wealth, then most of the items gained are "randomly" generated (DM's decisions don't have to be random). In this case having a character that gains something from items others deem worthless has some merit. But on the flip side, most of the neat items that the Monk character would want, others might feel that they benefit more from.

Case in point, it was awkward adjusting to some 3.5 games that had this "Emporium" feel because in 1st and 2nd we just got what we looted and were happy about it. If we wanted something special, either the DM custom tailored something or he found it in the DMG and sold it to us. This led to many a crazy adventure. In some of the DM's games, the players went far and wide to gather information/materials for crazy stuff, like +5 Full Plate of Free Action. Or a pair of +4 Returning Vorpal Hand Axes of Speed. Adventures where, if you lived, you gathered loot almost as good as the item you were trying to create.

Lord Tataraus
2008-03-30, 05:42 PM
I think classing the monk as an infiltrator or other skill monkey role is not a good measure of the monk. To me the designers were confused when they created the monk. On one side they wanted the kick-ass kung-fu guy and on the other they wanted mr. sneaky ninja with l337 acrobatics. This splits the monk into two parts, you have all your speed and movement for the ninja and then flurry and unarmed strike for kung-fu. If you rate a monk only on one aspect (the infiltrator, etc.) then you completely ignore the other side to it. I'm not saying that this makes the monk more viable, in fact I think it does the opposite. A monk is built to fill two roles and thus requires twice the amount of items to measure up to both and only focusing on one will cause the other aspect to hold the monk back.

Just my 2cp

Frosty
2008-03-30, 06:44 PM
So what do you think the Monk needs? Full BAB, more skill points, perhaps abilities that are X/encounter instead of per day?

Signmaker
2008-03-30, 06:49 PM
Frosty, I do have one thing to say. It consists of two words, and is particularly less verbose that the current words that are issuing out of my keystrokes.

Thank you.

Finally, a civilized and productive monk thread. It's been a few months.
Let's keep up the good, clean work people!

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-03-30, 07:10 PM
Frosty, I do have one thing to say. It consists of two words, and is particularly less verbose that the current words that are issuing out of my keystrokes.

Thank you.

Finally, a civilized and productive monk thread. It's been a few months.
Let's keep up the good, clean work people!

Any thread can start that way. It only takes Giamoco making one post:

"Monks don't need any fixes, they can do X."

Followed closely by Reel On, Love:

"Note that X is wrong/whatever."

And then we have a 40 page monstrosity at us again.

My usual fix is pretty simple, Not limit myself to Core.

Every character can solo encounters CR +5 out of Core, so just build your characters, and if someone wants a Monk, then you make a Wizard that doesn't take Incantatrix levels, and they cheese the hell out of their Monk (which usually involves taking as few monk levels as possible.)

Spiryt
2008-03-30, 07:11 PM
Frosty, I do have one thing to say. It consists of two words, and is particularly less verbose that the current words that are issuing out of my keystrokes.

Thank you.

Finally, a civilized and productive monk thread. It's been a few months.
Let's keep up the good, clean work people!

Actually, there is one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75668&page=2) on the third page. That was, like a week ago? Looked kinda civilized to me, and produced some tables, even.

There are too much of monk threads, and their possible politeness aren't changing anything :smallfrown:

Chronos
2008-03-30, 07:31 PM
...perhaps abilities that are X/encounter instead of per day?This, I would prefer not. I really don't like per encounter abilities, since they impose an artificial distinction on the game between "encounters" and "non-encounters". Going into "combat mode" is bad enough in computer games; I'd rather not have it in tabletop games, too.

If you really want per encounter-like abilities, I think the proper way to go is to base them on something other than encounters. For instance, you could let a class do something X times before they need to recharge, and it takes a full minute of concentrating/meditating/studying/exercising/whatever to recharge them. That way, they're probably not going to want to recharge in the middle of a genuine fight, but you don't have silliness like "I attack the rat so I can use my 1/encounter ability", or "I shoot an arrow at maximum range every three rounds so it's still the same encounter and the other guy can't recover".

Rutee
2008-03-30, 07:41 PM
Personally I /like/ per-encounter stuff for that very same reason. GMs can rule whether you've had that amount of time so much better then some arbitrary number listed in a book.

Miles Invictus
2008-03-30, 08:35 PM
Does the Monk get so much more out of items and consumables that he equals or exceeds the other classes? And also, with all the discussion about items, would the Monk get screwed more than the majority of other classes if he did not have any consumables or items?

The monk does not gain a significantly higher benefit from items and consumables. I will demonstrate this by analyzing an aspect of the game that the monk is designed to be strong in (specifically, armor class), and show that even in this best-case scenario, the monk fails to gain much benefit from his equipment.

Let's assume indeterminate wealth, elite array, a core, non-Epic game, and that all classes are configured for maximum AC. A 20th-level monk would have the following AC bonuses, ignoring things that everyone can get:
+10 from Dex. (15 base + 5 from levels + 6 from Gloves of Dexterity* + 5 from Tome of Dexterity = 31 Dexterity). Item cost: 36k + 138k.
+4 from Wis. (14 + 4 from Tome of Wisdom = 18 Wisdom)*. Item cost: 110k.
+4 from special monk AC. No item cost.
+8 from Bracers of Armor. Item cost: 64k gp.
+1 from Monk's Belt. Item cost: 13k gp.
Total AC: 10 + 27 = 37.
Total AC from items: +17 (+3 Gloves, +3 Tome of Dex, +2 Tome of Wis, +8 Bracers). Total cost: 351k gp.

For comparison, a 20th-level martial class would have something like this:
+13 from +5 Mithril Fullplate (+8 from fullplate, +5 from enchantment.) Cost: 37k gp.
+3 from Dex. (10 base + 6 from Gloves of Dexterity*. Mithril Fullplate has max Dex bonus of 3.) Cost: 36k gp.
+7 from +5 Animated Heavy Shield. (+2 from Heavy Shield, +5 from enchantment.) Cost: 49k gp.
Total AC: 10 + 23 = 33.
Total AC from items: +23 (+3 gloves, +13 from armor, +7 from shield). Total cost: 122k gp.

Clearly, the monk has a higher AC. Note, however, that a significant portion of the monk's AC (10 points!) comes from class features and base stats. If you look strictly at item-based bonuses, it becomes clear that the monk spends three times as much money as a martial class for two-thirds of the benefit.

*For maximum AC, the savvy Monk will buy an +5 Amulet of Natural Armor over a +6 Periapt of Wisdom. However, anyone can buy an Amulet of Natural Armor, so we ignore this. Gloves of Dexterity are included, however, because armor-wearing classes have maximum Dex bonuses.

Now, factor in that the martial class has a good base attack bonus. All other things being equal, it will have an attack bonus 5 points higher than the monk*. The martial class can even the field merely by fighting defensively -- his AC will be two lower than the monk, but his attack bonus will be one higher.

If the martial class invests in Combat Expertise, he can sacrifice 4 points to equal the monk's AC, and still have an attack bonus one point higher than the monk. (This assumes the martial class did not purchase a Belt of Giant Strength.)

* Implicitly, the monk has taken Weapon Finesse to maximize his attack bonus, and the martial class has focused on strength the way the monk has focused on dexterity.

Keep in mind that the magic items selected for the monk specifically benefit the monk more than other classes. Put another way, these are items that the monk is the best at using. The magic items selected for the martial class are general-use items that a whole host of classes -- Crusader, Duskblade, Fighter, Knight, Paladin, Warblade -- get the same benefit from.

The general-use items provide a greater benefit for a significantly lower cost, even when the specific-use items have their benefit maximized. Given that most items are not specifically tailored to benefit monks, it's safe to conclude that monks do not, in general, benefit from magic items more than other classes.

Roland St. Jude
2008-03-30, 09:31 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: We already have a monk thread on the first page of gaming.

ashmanonar
2008-03-30, 09:33 PM
Let's not forget ethical restrictions, either. Monks have that issue of needing to stay lawful.

No, let's forget ethical restrictions. They're deliberately annoying and entirely subject to DM fiat. DM doesn't like the way you're playing that Paladin? Oops, you did something against the code.

More to the point, I really don't think that lawful means quite what the designers of D&D actually thought it means, especially in regards to Monks and Paladins. Monks in particular would be far more likely to be Neutral; not beholden to any law or code but their own. They wouldn't CARE about the problems of the world, except as they apply to their own problems. That's the entire point of a "monastery," to escape from worldly problems.

If you want a code of honor for your character to follow, go for it. Consider that an RP issue. Enjoy playing a character with strict honor. But deliberately restricting alignments for two classes that really aren't even that powerful (as compared to some others; namely Wiz/Cler/Dru) only keeps people from playing those classes more effectively.

Sholos
2008-03-30, 10:17 PM
Now compare Touch ACs of the Monk and the Fighter. Monk is a lot better.

Not saying that the monk isn't in serious need of revamping, but there are a few key places where they shine.

Frosty
2008-03-31, 03:44 AM
Ok, so AC Monks don't get the most benefit from items. What about in terms of scouting/infiltrating/assassinating/mobile stun-machine? With WBL that doesn't depend overly-heavily on custom items (because not all DMs allow item emporiums), can they do adequately well in those roles? If so, how much worse are they to other classes more suited for the roles? I mean, if they can scout *almost* as good as the Rogue (for argument's sake), then it's not really that fair to bash the Monk as much as we do. On the other hand, if it just completely sucks balls, then...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-31, 03:57 AM
Sorry, no. In any dungeon crawl, the character without trapfinding is not an acceptable scout. They're guaranteed to die in ToH-style travesty. Plus, again, the Monk is not capable of maxing the skills necessary. Hide, MS, Disable Device, Listen, Open Lock, Search, Spot, Tumble. A good scout needs to be able to max most of those, with spells and items being able to substitute for the rest. A monk that only works at scouting will be inferior to a rouge or ranger that specializes in it, simply on the basis of skill points.

Tokiko Mima
2008-03-31, 04:40 AM
Well, I kind of like Dimension Door...although I wish it's more than 1/day.

If it's a teleport you're after, literally any 6th level or higher character can pick up a 50' range standard action teleport useable 1/encounter by taking Martial Study: Shadow Jaunt Feat.

It's not as long of a distance, of course, but it's sufficent to get out of Forcecages at the very least.

Reel On, Love
2008-03-31, 04:45 AM
If it's a teleport you're after, literally any 6th level or higher character can pick up a 50' range standard action teleport useable 1/encounter by taking Martial Study: Shadow Jaunt Feat.

It's not as long of a distance, of course, but it's sufficent to get out of Forcecages at the very least.

Shadow Jaunt requires Line of Effect as well as Line of Sight, so it can't get you through walls or out of Forcecages.

lord_khaine
2008-03-31, 05:39 AM
Sorry, no. In any dungeon crawl, the character without trapfinding is not an acceptable scout. They're guaranteed to die in ToH-style travesty.
actualy it has allways worked pretty well for me, and it makes exploring the dungeon a lot faster.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-31, 05:50 AM
There are 3 basic ways to find and disarm traps:
Summon Monster
High Con Barbarian+Cleric
Rogue

A trap with an auto-reset renders the first 2 useless, and quite possibly fatal, in a party environment. A no-save, just die, auto-hit trap makes the second a bad idea. The third is designed for traps, and very hard to render useless against them. Especially a smart Rogue. Yes, a Monk can walk through a dungeon, relying on saves to see him through in a similar way to a Barbarian. This would be an auto-die in any campaign where a GM uses traps and doesn't nerf them for the Monk's benefit. Trapfinding is basic for a scout.

Nebo_
2008-03-31, 05:52 AM
actualy it has allways worked pretty well for me, and it makes exploring the dungeon a lot faster.

Dying, too.

Rutee
2008-03-31, 10:01 AM
No, let's forget ethical restrictions. They're deliberately annoying and entirely subject to DM fiat. DM doesn't like the way you're playing that Paladin? Oops, you did something against the code.

More to the point, I really don't think that lawful means quite what the designers of D&D actually thought it means, especially in regards to Monks and Paladins. Monks in particular would be far more likely to be Neutral; not beholden to any law or code but their own. They wouldn't CARE about the problems of the world, except as they apply to their own problems. That's the entire point of a "monastery," to escape from worldly problems.

Um, no. Sorry. First off, the point of a monastery isn't to escape worldly /problems/. It's to leave worldly /distractions/ and seek Spiritual Enlightenment. Finding unorthodox (To others) solutions to the worldly problems of others can be a good way to test and spread that enlightenment.

Second, the point of the Lawful Alignment isn't that they follow a code; It's that martial arts training is extremely rigorous and nearly impossible to complete without extensive training and internal discipline. PErsonally I don't know why that forces them Lawful; Wizards need tons of training too, they're not shoehorned into an alignment...

As to nerfing traps down for the monk.. isn't that just sensible? I mean, a good GM makes encounters for the party they have, not the party that they 'should' have. Why throw heavy traps at the party if what you have is a Monk for a scout, not somebody with Trapfinding?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-31, 10:17 AM
As to nerfing traps down for the monk.. isn't that just sensible? I mean, a good GM makes encounters for the party they have, not the party that they 'should' have. Why throw heavy traps at the party if what you have is a Monk for a scout, not somebody with Trapfinding?That's the point, though. This thread is about monk balance, and if they have to have something nerfed so they can fulfill the role that they are supposed to have, then they aren't balanced. You might as well say they are the equal in melee of a barbarian, because having a barbarian would mean the GM would just send monsters with more DR against them.

Rutee
2008-03-31, 10:21 AM
Strictly speaking, the thread's about whether Monks benefit from Magic Items more, which this has nothing to do with :P

Indon
2008-03-31, 10:28 AM
Monks benefit more than most noncasters from items that grant size increases (because they use high damage dice) and from items that grant climb/swim/fly speeds (because their enhancement bonus applies to them). With everything else they either break even, or are a bit worse on the cost effectiveness factor.

If you _really_ want to buff the Monk to remove their magic item dependence, you can grant them Wild Shape as a Druid. In one truly fell swoop, you've eliminated their MAD, given them near-caster levels of mobility, significantly boosted their damage, and, well, wild shapes enhance almost everything a monk would want magic items to enhance in combat (being str/dex/con, size increase, climb/swim/fly speeds). I'd recommend this for only higher-power games, though.

SpikeFightwicky
2008-03-31, 11:36 AM
Monks benefit more than most noncasters from items that grant size increases (because they use high damage dice) and from items that grant climb/swim/fly speeds (because their enhancement bonus applies to them). With everything else they either break even, or are a bit worse on the cost effectiveness factor.

I don't really agree with the first part. A size increase for fighter or barbarian will (typically) increase their weapon damage by one die (greatsword goes from 2d6 to 3d6, etc...) in a similar fashion to monk size increase (3d8 to 4d8, etc...). It's pretty even between all melee classes as far as damage dice increase is concerned.

Chronos
2008-03-31, 11:38 AM
A monk that only works at scouting will be inferior to a rouge or ranger that specializes in it, simply on the basis of skill points.It's worse than that... A monk that specializes in scouting will be inferior to a rogue or ranger that doesn't specialize in it. The rogue has enough skill points to be good at scouting and also at a few other things.

Roland St. Jude
2008-03-31, 11:38 AM
Sheriff of Moddingham: We already have a monk thread on the first page of gaming.

This time with actual thread locking. :smallsigh: