Beating Batman: Sir Giacomo's Guide to Monks

[Sir Giacomo]

ummm dude?

hourserules and champaign changes to classes and tewaks can help classes, bu that 's how a game's played, not how he class is made...


i mean, you can make a monk better than a wizard if you have a campaign setinside a frikkin' huge antimagicfield, but that doesn't mean anything...

using a camaign setting and dm powers to help/hinder classes doesn't help the discussion

My point entirely.


anyways, you know there isn't a magial warlmart in most campains, so your monk has to spend (days weeks months?) searching for the right store with the right magic item?

I would argue that finding a secure place undisturbed for days weeks months is much rarer in most campaigns than finding a settlement of sentient beings of up to town size for the time necessary to buy and sell something (say, your loot).

- Giacomo

[Stupendous_Man]

My point entirely.
you missed the part where is aid that haivng the dm manually balance classes doesn't make them equal classes.




I would argue that finding a secure place undisturbed for days weeks months is much rarer in most campaigns than finding a settlement of sentient beings of up to town size for the time necessary to buy and sell something (say, your loot).

- Giacomo

i would argue that finding a quite place is much more commen than finding magicmart in every town

even if every town had a magic store, how do you garuntee what you want is in stock?

[mostlyharmful]

I would argue that finding a secure place undisturbed for days weeks months is much rarer in most campaigns than finding a settlement of sentient beings of up to town size for the time necessary to buy and sell something (say, your loot).

And there is obviously no difference between finding a population centre with the listed GP ranges and finding one that will buy all an adventurors parties crap, at market value, with no warning and then be able to supply any item of that GP value or below, with no warning on the purchase. Oh, and any partially charged version of those items as well... Because that's far more likely than having downtime in a campaign... What???:smallconfused:

What you're arguing isn't that you can find a population centre, it's that every population centre is as flexible as Sigil. I know the DMG says they'll have a certain amount of cash available but assuming any and all frounter wholesale farming+fishing store with a sideline in supplying standard weapons and armour to have a safe in back with Everything you could want, as charged as you want is a bit dubious. Buy all the hoes, seed and horseblankets you want, shifting that shiney doohicky's gonna take some time.

[Rashmi]

I don't feel like commenting on the rest of it.

And I know why.:smallsmile:

This is incredibly disingenuous of you. You have on many occasions said things like, "I'm just not going to address this any more." when you were clearly wrong instead of just admitting it.

To imply that someone can't address your points every time they get sick of arguing with a brick wall that insults them every post is pretty silly in that light.

I mean at least everyone can see why they have grown tired of being insulted, just like we can see that you have no response to so many of the things you choose to ignore.

[Guyr Adamantine]

The theory of many other posters is that the (core) rules are inherently flawed, so that overpowered wizards and underpowered monks are the result.

What you fail to realise is that while yes, wizards are overpowered, monks are an incredible example of flawed design. Their class abilities have little to no interaction, they need all characteristics in the stratosphere except Charisma and nobody has any reason to be one beyond four levels!

What you're pointing here is that monks can beat wizards if they use tactics anybody else can use.

EDIT: I suggest you read Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: Being a God (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=956548). You'll notice how much God Wizards are team players instead of the idiots you put them to be.

[Vexxation]

This discussion will never end.

Giacomo will continue to say that everyone who disagrees with him uses flawed reasoning. This, he believes, is why the wizard is viewed as more powerful than the monk. See quote:
My theory (which I think have provided with a lot of proof) is that this is due to the rules being misinterpreted or ignored that
- result in overpwered wizards (e.g. automatically regaining spells overnight, never realy targeted by opponents/monsters/npcs) and
- underpowered monks (e.g. magic items cannot be baught, partially charged wands are a ridiculous idea, stealth tactics will not result in any noteworthy amount of surprise round/and/or buff rounds)

Now, what rules are being misinterpreted? Which are being ignored?
If you claim that you refer to that "partially-charged wand" tripe as misinterpreted or ignored, then the discussion is deadlocked.

See, Giacomo, the problem with your ideas, that you can pick up a wand of [spell] with [#] of charges to meet your whims, is that if you picture your average quasi-magical medieval setting, it doesn't fit in. Yes, if you can sell it, you can buy it, but only because you already sold it. You can't sell a Wand of Doom, 12 charges, and then somehow assume that you can buy a Wand of Bull's Strength, 25 charges. It breaks verisimilitude.

However, I know, for a fact, that what I say will not sway the opinions of anyone who does not already agree with me. You see, we humans make up our minds first and then rationalize it with data. Giacomo has it in his mind that a monk can be as much an asset to the party as a wizard.

I agree with him. I merely feel that he's going about it in the wrong way. He took a monk, and made it a secondhand wizard. And a secondhand fighter. Heck, and a secondhand rogue.

I'm sure he'd be much better off if he'd made a build that didn't even bother using UMD.

But, unfortunately, that's how he decided to solve the "problem" and, as both sides of the argument are as stubborn as can be, neither side wins, and the argument continues for 67 pages.

[Rashmi]

Here's another thing:

Gia handwaves away any objection to his several round buff routine using UMD checks that he doesn't even always succeed at, Claims he always has concealment, can always hide, sneak up on all opponents, run away without any consequences, no one can run away from him, ect.

Then he claims that everyone else is using convulted rules interpretations such as: "The Wizard inside a MMM gets a full nights rest."

And he doesn't see the irony in that claim? We are playing it wrong because WIzard's get spells like Rope Trick and Teleport that explicitly allow them to be safe for the night, but he can make a hide check at any time no matter what. (And all that other stuff that takes far too long to repeat.)

Look at his chain of time:

1) It is very hard to get eight hours of rest.

2) It is very easy to find a town filled with a magic shop.

3) It is very hard to spend a few days in that town crafting items.


Apparently Gia has this weird belief that people get attacked every 4 hours inside a town, so no one can rest in a town, and no one can craft in a town, but people can totally show up, buy items and leave.

If it is so hard to craft items while resting in that town, then why does that town have all those items?

[Fenix_of_Doom]

OK.
WE ATUALLY ALL HAVE THE SAME OPINION::smallsmile:
Wizards are overpowered in most campaigns, monks are underpowered in most campaigns.

I just realised you are completely wrong, you see most here think the monk is a badly designed class with little synergy in his class features and thus weak, while the wizard is badly designed because spells are too powerful and too versatile.

[Stupendous_Man]

Look at his chain of time:

1) It is very hard to get eight hours of rest.

2) It is very easy to find a town filled with a magic shop.

3) It is very hard to spend a few days in that town crafting items.


Apparently Gia has this weird belief that people get attacked every 4 hours inside a town, so no one can rest in a town, and no one can craft in a town, but people can totally show up, buy items and leave.

If it is so hard to craft items while resting in that town, then why does that town have all those items?

maybe the party is bieng targeted frequently, not the town people

[Worira]

INSIDE OF COMBAT: the monk can create early on concealment with a horn o fog safely. Lateron, with an eversmoking bottle. The moment he does that, he can with two wands in hands (all his monk fighting is unimpeded by that) attempt activation (standard action, making a sound) and move silently (move action). This will usually confuse all opponents, even those who COULD pinpoint him with a good listen check despite the likely high penalties due to the high move of the monk. WHERE IS THE PROBLEM HERE?

Yeah, the problem with that is that your party hates you now.

[Siosilvar]

I just realised you are completely wrong, you see most here think the monk is a badly designed class with little synergy in his class features and thus weak, while the wizard is badly designed because spells are too powerful and too versatile.

Yes, monks are underpowered (weak) in most campaigns and wizards are overpowered (powerful and versatile) in most campaigns.

To borrow someone else's "thing":
PROTIP: Don't argue that someone else is right.

[Fenix_of_Doom]

Yes, monks are underpowered (weak) in most campaigns and wizards are overpowered (powerful and versatile) in most campaigns.

Your point?



To borrow someone else's "thing":
PROTIP: Don't argue that someone else is right.

That's senseless, if someone else is right someone else is right, why would I argue otherwise?
Tip: you need to be a pro to give PROTIPS.

[Stupendous_Man]

OK.

I just had a major insight, which can maybe help also this entire discussion.

WE ATUALLY ALL HAVE THE SAME OPINION::smallsmile:
Wizards are overpowered in most campaigns, monks are underpowered in most campaigns.

My theory (which I think have provided with a lot of proof) is that this is due to the rules being misinterpreted or ignored that
...
What do you think?

- Giacomo

so... everyone else int eh world is playing dnd wrong.

dude...

[Guyr Adamantine]

Yes, monks are underpowered (weak) in most campaigns and wizards are overpowered (powerful and versatile) in most campaigns.

To borrow someone else's "thing":
PROTIP: Don't argue that someone else is right.

There is a difference between "under/overpowered" and "badly designed", you know.

[Covered In Bees]

Your point?



That's senseless, if someone else is right someone else is right, why would I argue otherwise?
Tip: you need to be a pro to give PROTIPS.

Yeah, leave the PROTIPping to me.

(PROTIP: if you aren't finding the partially charged wand you want, try slipping the DM a twenty.)

[Sinfire Titan]

- best grappler (No. of attacks, damage, bonus feat, spc additional effects like stunning fist- Note: FAQ has nerfed to no longer use stunning fist to be possible alongside grapple damage, so use unarmed strike with stun before grapple or in grapple at -4. His medium BAB does not matter much, and he can easily overcome it – see below)

I am contesting this claim. Heavily. Both the Druid and the Totemist can get massive Grapple bonuses, and the Totemist can even beat the Monk in number of attacks/round (in both melee and ranged). Furthermore, there are a number of advantages for the Druid in grapple (size, sheer magical offense, ability to gain poison for use in grapple) that put the monk in its place. In a straight-up fight, a 9th level Druid would own a 9th level Monk. The same can be said for a 5th level Druid (Fleshraker Wild Shape+Bull's Strength). Hell, even at 1st level, the Druid has an advantage in the form of an Animal Companion.

As for the Totemist, Girallon Arms+Str of 18=Dead Monk. 4 claw attacks a round at 3rd level, and you can get a massive bonus on the grapple check as early as 1st level. Three points of Essentia in the Arms gives +8 to Grapple checks, and the fact that you have 4 arms from this bind alone gives an extra +4. Your BAB and Strength bonuses with this gives a total of +18 on Grapple checks, before you even think of adding in Improved Grapple (easily obtained).

Lastly, the Totemist can get a better bonus to attack rolls than you can to armor class. That same 3rd level Azurin Totemist (Note that I can easily get better bonuses at the same rate you can) has a +9/+4/+4/+4, compared to your potential +4/+4 at the same level. Your AC at best is a 21 before you even get to act, meaning I hit you on a 1o with the first attack on a charge, but you need a Dex and Wis of 20 apiece just to have that AC (realistically, your AC is probably a 17 or 18, maybe more if you have Combat Expertise and Dodge with Bracers of Armor and if you beat me in init). And I have four shots next turn to try and hit your Touch AC.

In a Grapple Contest, the Totemist and Druid both beat the Monk, hands down. Either one is capable of taking you down without much a threat as early as 2nd level, and the Totemist still does better than you at 1st level (as does the Druid's AC). Your odds only go downhill the higher the level gets.

[Arbitrarity]

Ok, so, can we stop the discussion now? (Unifier)

Giamoco is of the opinion, as are most of us, that the monk is an underpowered class in most campaigns/games.
He agrees that wizards are overpowered in most games (actually, I disagree with this. I think it can be overpowered in most games).

The point that we disagree on is that the monk is impossible to make a viable competitor to a wizard.
Giamoco is of the opinion that some restrictions which he believes are reasonable and supported, even expected, on full caster power, result in a fairly balanced game. He also believes that given some circumstances, which he similarly believes to be neccessary, or important to verismilitude, the monk can make a perfectly viable contribution to a party.

I disagree with none of this. I disagree with, however, a few rules interpretations on his part, and his premises of what constitute a reasonable game.

However, that is contesting premises. And axioms are generally useless to contest. Giamoco agrees that given our premises, the monk is probably underpowered, and the wizard overpowered. He argues that with his premises, they are fairly close to balanced.

Great. Now all we can argue are premises.

Incidentally, I don't see how he can consider familiars and leadership to be balanced against each other, nor polymorph and wildshape (Though I concede that the "permanent" nature of wildshape is probably overpowered).
I disagree with some generalized statistics given "High" initiative modifiers.
I also disagree with his opinion that the information given makes the monk an important contribution to a party. It may make it a viable contribution, maybe even a useful one, but certainly not a unique one, even within core rules.

But that's not important. If we were Ok with Gia's premises, we'd probably agree his conclusions follow. However, some, including myself, disagree on premises. I.e. core only, resting,

Also, you probably misinterpreted a few of my arguments :smallbiggrin:. My "information from nowhere" is related to mage-slaying, mostly. "Doormat" party mostly refers to the manner in which the party seems to heavily support the monk in combat, including following his (9 Cha :smallwink:) lead in delay tactics, stealth, etc. Many parties, I find, are not willing to hide in fog for a few rounds, so as to allow a party member to buff. Now, they can all buff, but there are circumstances where they may believe that not to be necessary. Also, hiding in fog cedes the field to your opponents, which leads to tactical disadvantage (readied actions, flanking, etc.)

Totemist is non-core, therefore not important here. Sorry :smallsigh:

See, there's a premise I don't like. We give that one to Giamoco, because we aren't going to bother contesting. We claim other premises aren't valid, but in what context?

The context of "The average game". Giamoco seems to agree that this is the case.

Therefore, he has a specific game, probably still following the rules, with different interpretations. He will ignore arguments based on premises not applying to most games, as he is aware that this is the case. Therefore, we have no real way to change his mind, except by showing flaws in internal consistiency, between premises and result, i.e. flawed reasoning.

I disagree that many posters here have flawed reasoning. I think we have different premises, which is entirely different.

[Emperor Tippy]

No, Giacomo has a flawed premise. If you accept his premise then his build might be ok but that premise is worthless. He assumes the availability of partially charged wands after character generation. He assumes that the rest of the party won't kill him for spending all day in a Smoke Bottles AoE. He assumes that wizards won't use their class features. He assumes that he gets buff time before every fight.

And that not even getting into his shady rules interpretations.

[Arbitrarity]

Precisely. We're unlikely to change anyone's mind on premises, unless we can thoroughly prove those premises impossible in the rules, or wholly unreasonable.

And Tippy, totally unreasonable describes D&D 3.5 RAW as you well know, so don't be judging :smallwink:

And isn't that what I said, anyways?

So, back to basics. Let us identify the premises we disagree upon, and hold rules discussions on each. Or, ignore those that are irreconcilable.

Lessee:
1: Partially charged wands are/aren't available for purchase after character creation.
2: Party is/isn't rarely surprised. (This is mostly based on tactics)
3: Party does/doesn't often surprise enemies. (Tactics, and senses. It's unreasonable, IMHO, for everyone to have Darkstalker)
4: Casters can/can't rest at night, through use of spells like rope trick, MMM, etc.
5: Magic items can/can't be crafted due to time constraints.
6: Availability of custom items.

Many of these can be divided into sub-premises, which can also be argued over. For example, 4 can become a rules discussion, or a "reasonable" discussion, based on the number of flying, invisible seeing monsters in your game, or creatures searching specifically for the casters in question.
More of these can be created.

[Sir Giacomo]

This is incredibly disingenuous of you. You have on many occasions said things like, "I'm just not going to address this any more." when you were clearly wrong instead of just admitting it.

To imply that someone can't address your points every time they get sick of arguing with a brick wall that insults them every post is pretty silly in that light.

I mean at least everyone can see why they have grown tired of being insulted, just like we can see that you have no response to so many of the things you choose to ignore.

Please Rashmi, do not quote what I did not say (the first sentence was never posted by me). This is bad discussion style.
And the tons of responses I already did in this thread is testimony to the fact that I hardly ignore stuff.

- Giacomo

[Sir Giacomo]

EDIT: I suggest you read Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: Being a God (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=956548). You'll notice how much God Wizards are team players instead of the idiots you put them to be.

Yes, everyone, follow that link! You'll see how well Treantmonk thinks of those in the party who play anything else but the wizard.
Party roles apart from GOD: "The Fop", "The Corpse", "The Gimp", "The big stupid fighter", "The Glass Cannon", "The Waste of Space".
Shall I go on? No, I think that suffices.

- Giacomo

[Arbitrarity]

Actually, he does that in 4E. It's "roleplaying" from the perspective of a conceited wizard.

It's true, he says so himself in his 4E wizard guide.

[Sir Giacomo]

Here's another thing:

Gia handwaves away any objection to his several round buff routine using UMD checks that he doesn't even always succeed at, Claims he always has concealment, can always hide, sneak up on all opponents, run away without any consequences, no one can run away from him, ect.

Then he claims that everyone else is using convulted rules interpretations such as: "The Wizard inside a MMM gets a full nights rest."

And he doesn't see the irony in that claim? We are playing it wrong because WIzard's get spells like Rope Trick and Teleport that explicitly allow them to be safe for the night, but he can make a hide check at any time no matter what. (And all that other stuff that takes far too long to repeat.)

Look at his chain of time:

1) It is very hard to get eight hours of rest.

2) It is very easy to find a town filled with a magic shop.

3) It is very hard to spend a few days in that town crafting items.


Apparently Gia has this weird belief that people get attacked every 4 hours inside a town, so no one can rest in a town, and no one can craft in a town, but people can totally show up, buy items and leave.

If it is so hard to craft items while resting in that town, then why does that town have all those items?

MMMs? 8 hour+ rope tricks? Where are these coming from for the wizard at low levels who HAS TO SURVIVE FIRST TO GET HIGH ENOUGH IN LEVEL TO CAST THAT? Not to mention that even those are NOT 100% SAFE! Especially not when you are threatened by an enemy (the reason why you use it in the first place) and said enemy looks for you, sets an ambush etc.
8 hours of rest inside an adventure - where is that town coming from here? Have you ever played adventures this way on a common basis? Meanwhile, BUYING an item that probalby needs much LESS time is only necessary from time to time, BETWEEN ADVENTURES. Not during them.
Incredible.
And yes. It is very easy to find a town filled with a magic shop, when said town has the appropriate size for the item.
And yes, it is much more difficult to find a town with a fully equipped laboratory where you can remain undisturbed for weeks and months to forge that ring of freedom of movement.
And what btw makes you think that the fighter will get that 8,325 Greatsword +2 more easily than a monk getting his 450 gp 5-charge Bull's strength wand?
The ONLY parameter delivered by the DMG rules for item availability IS THE PRICE! Nothing else.

And I said dozens of times already - that fluff of magic mart including partially charged items may not be to everyone's liking, but it is what the rules assume. Change the fluff, if you like.

- Giacomo

[Sir Giacomo]

OK, after this...

...hi again everyone.

In particualr thanks to Arbitrarity for summing up again precisely part of the discussion, in particular the different premises we have.


1: Partially charged wands are/aren't available for purchase after character creation.
2: Party is/isn't rarely surprised. (This is mostly based on tactics)
3: Party does/doesn't often surprise enemies. (Tactics, and senses. It's unreasonable, IMHO, for everyone to have Darkstalker)
4: Casters can/can't rest at night, through use of spells like rope trick, MMM, etc.
5: Magic items can/can't be crafted due to time constraints.
6: Availability of custom items.
.

Now, I may deduct 6, since I never raised the issue of custom items (only when moving beyond core since I would find it odd a DM allows prestige class X of awesomeness Y and not a ring of mind blank 1/day.)

Otherwise just some
additional comments
1) We resolved this already (remember Lord_Silvanos' ruling): no partially wands avaiable by the RAW after character creation (of whatever respective level). The guide then still is helpful in that it provides ideas for higher level character creation (partially charged wands are possible as per DMG p. 199 for higher level character creation).
2), 3) Probably the major difference here is not often/rarely, but what is more seen as more likely by both sides of the argument.
I say that yes, the party will surprise thanks to stealth tactics opponents more often than the other way round.
4) I referred to the likelihood of being disturbed in recovering spells overnight. I say it is often enough to matter, the other side says it never matters, certainly not with MMM and rope trick up (which I would not see 100% safe).
5) I never said magic items can never be crafted due to time constraints, I only said the issue of time constraints will come up in MOST campaigns (even in the dragonlance campaign you would have had enough time to create low-level wands and potions, and write scrolls, for instance)

Will go to bed now...

- Giacomo

[Sir Giacomo]

And to provide answers to someone not really wishing to argue fairly and full of fear that I kick his 16th level wizard back to reality...:smallwink:


No, Giacomo has a flawed premise. If you accept his premise then his build might be ok but that premise is worthless.

:smallsigh:

He assumes the availability of partially charged wands after character generation.

I do not. That issue was settled long ago by Lord Silvanos.

He assumes that the rest of the party won't kill him for spending all day in a Smoke Bottles AoE.
Not one tactics I so far proposed that the monk should stay all day ina smoke bottle AoE.

He assumes that wizards won't use their class features.

I never said a wizard should not use their class features. Only that some likely circumstances would be obstacles to that, as they exist for all characters.

He assumes that he gets buff time before every fight.

No, I do not. Never did.

And that not even getting into his shady rules interpretations

Yep.

- Giacomo

[Guyr Adamantine]

Yes, everyone, follow that link! You'll see how well Treantmonk thinks of those in the party who play anything else but the wizard.
Party roles apart from GOD: "The Fop", "The Corpse", "The Gimp", "The big stupid fighter", "The Glass Cannon", "The Waste of Space".
Shall I go on? No, I think that suffices.

- Giacomo

{Scrubbed}

The tactics used by God Wizards: Buffing (You love it, it seems), debuffing (It helps you defeat your enemies) and battlefield control (Preventing the enemy from fleeing/use the battlefield to its own advantage). Their whole point is making the rest of the team shine on their own.

{Scrubbed}

[Emperor Tippy]

And to provide answers to someone not really wishing to argue fairly and full of fear that I kick his 16th level wizard back to reality...:smallwink:
Um no. I've just been waiting for Talic. Beating the Joker really isn't hard. Thanks to my Contingency I will get to act first. Thanks to my Phantom Steed I can stay out of your range. I can fly around in circles until you run out of buffs and then kill you. Or I can use Disjunction to get rid of all your defenses and then just whack you with Power Word: Stun followed by whatever. Or I can hit you with a Barred Force Cage once your Rod of Cancellation and 1/day DD are used up and then just send in Incendiary Clouds until you die.

[Covered In Bees]

And I said dozens of times already - that fluff of magic mart including partially charged items may not be to everyone's liking, but it is what the rules assume. Change the fluff, if you like.

- Giacomo

You do realize that someone can make a +2 Whatever greatsword on commission, but no one can make a 5-charge wand, right? If you want to buy a 5-charge wand in the town of Nowhere-In-Particular, you can't do so unless someone just happened to have a wand of Bull's Strength, and use all but five charges, and be in that town when they decided to sell the remaining 5 (they could use 45 charges, but didn't want the other 5? Why?). This isn't just "magic mart", it's absolutely ridiculous.

This is so OBVIOUSLY ridiculous, in fact, the only reason you cling to it is because you know even the other ridiculous things you say absolutely rely on it! You keep on talking about how the monk should have all these spells availible, but that's impossible when he needs to spend 4,500 gp (wouldn't you rather get a +2 stat booster by the time you have that accumulated?) for a level 2 wand, 9000 gp for two of them (you can afford that at level 4?), etc.

[Arbitrarity]

Actually, if you include custom items, "5-charge" wands are possible to make, as 50 charge wands eating 10 charges/use.
Or is that staves only?

[Guyr Adamantine]

Actually, if you include custom items, "5-charge" wands are possible to make, as 50 charge wands eating 10 charges/use.
Or is that staves only?

Staff only.

[Deepblue706]

Um no. I've just been waiting for Talic. Beating the Joker really isn't hard. Thanks to my Contingency I will get to act first. Thanks to my Phantom Steed I can stay out of your range. I can fly around in circles until you run out of buffs and then kill you. Or I can use Disjunction to get rid of all your defenses and then just whack you with Power Word: Stun followed by whatever. Or I can hit you with a Barred Force Cage once your Rod of Cancellation and 1/day DD are used up and then just send in Incendiary Clouds until you die.

What? You only need one spell to beat Joker, and that's Fabricate.

Stand near a forest, and use it to make a house.

Have a guy dressed like you run inside.

Wait for Joker to follow, lock the one door, and set the building on fire. Okay, maybe if you want to do it quicker, you could use a fireball (although alchemical items suffice).

...

Okay, it might not be foolproof, but I've always wanted to do that.

[Arbitrarity]

Curses. My DMG agrees.
Custom wondrous item? Nooo... huh, that's odd. No rules for making items with a number of charges other than 50 in my DMG.

[Guyr Adamantine]

Curses. My DMG agrees.
Custom wondrous item? Nooo... huh, that's odd. No rules for making items with a number of charges other than 50 in my DMG.

{Scrubbed}

[Covered In Bees]

Curses. My DMG agrees.
Custom wondrous item? Nooo... huh, that's odd. No rules for making items with a number of charges other than 50 in my DMG.

Gee, I wonder if that could possibly be because you're not supposed to have items with a number of charges other than 50 unless you started with 50 and used some up?
If you want a 5-charge item, buy 5 scrolls. This is more expensive than 5 charges of a wand, because it offers so many advantages, such as being affordable to purchase use to use rather than having to shell out one lump sum, and being able to have 20 different ones rather than 50 charges of the same thing.

[Arbitrarity]

Well, I'm looking in the custom items section. Anyways, we're all in agreement on this point, thanks to popcorn tyrant.

Pick another topic, like.. actually, most of those are player/DM specific, rather than rules specific. Ah well.

[Covered In Bees]

Well, I'm looking in the custom items section. Anyways, we're all in agreement on this point, thanks to popcorn tyrant.

Pick another topic, like.. actually, most of those are player/DM specific, rather than rules specific. Ah well.

Even though he says he aknowledges he can't get partially charged wands ina game, his builds and advice still rely on them.

[Andras]

Gee, I wonder if that could possibly be because you're not supposed to have items with a number of charges other than 50 unless you started with 50 and used some up?
If you want a 5-charge item, buy 5 scrolls. This is more expensive than 5 charges of a wand, because it offers so many advantages, such as being affordable to purchase use to use rather than having to shell out one lump sum, and being able to have 20 different ones rather than 50 charges of the same thing.

Indeed. Buying a lump sum is kind of the point of wand pricing, or else nobody would ever use scrolls, ever, because there'd be no point.

Also:


http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i245/mgorinev/RAGE.jpg

I had a feeling I detected a familiar element in this thread...

[Sinfire Titan]

Gee, I wonder if that could possibly be because you're not supposed to have items with a number of charges other than 50 unless you started with 50 and used some up?
If you want a 5-charge item, buy 5 scrolls. This is more expensive than 5 charges of a wand, because it offers so many advantages, such as being affordable to purchase use to use rather than having to shell out one lump sum, and being able to have 20 different ones rather than 50 charges of the same thing.

The rules for partially charged wands are found in the MiC, but they only allow 10 or 20 charges, not 5.

[Covered In Bees]

The rules for partially charged wands are found in the MiC, but they only allow 10 or 20 charges, not 5.

As a guideline for equipping NPCs. Which makes sense, since they'd presumably have been using the wand themselves. It basically says you might consider giving a PC one if he requests it, at some point.

In other words, good freaking luck.

[Rashmi]

Please Rashmi, do not quote what I did not say (the first sentence was never posted by me). This is bad discussion style.
And the tons of responses I already did in this thread is testimony to the fact that I hardly ignore stuff.

I was paraphrasing. Nobody questions that you reply to things when you have something to say. You just do an awful lot of ignoring things when people prove you absolutely wrong and you have no defense.


MMMs? 8 hour+ rope tricks? Where are these coming from for the wizard at low levels who HAS TO SURVIVE FIRST TO GET HIGH ENOUGH IN LEVEL TO CAST THAT? Not to mention that even those are NOT 100% SAFE! Especially not when you are threatened by an enemy (the reason why you use it in the first place) and said enemy looks for you, sets an ambush etc.

1) It is very easy to survive to 5th level thank you very much.

2) You don't cast it when threatened by an enemy, you cast it out of the way when no one is looking, possibly inside a wall depending on level.


8 hours of rest inside an adventure - where is that town coming from here? Have you ever played adventures this way on a common basis? Meanwhile, BUYING an item that probalby needs much LESS time is only necessary from time to time, BETWEEN ADVENTURES. Not during them.

Yes, I do play adventures this way all the time. That town is coming from the teleport spell.

Pray tell what is an "adventure"? Does it last a day? A year? 5 minutes? What does it consist of?

You certainly can't be talking about published adventures, because all of those that are considered even remotely decent (there are some set with punishing time limits so bad that metagaming optimizers using intense cheatery barely complete them on time, but those are very few) all provide plenty of time for crafting. And often nearby towns.


Incredible.

Stupendous? Cantankerous?


And yes. It is very easy to find a town filled with a magic shop, when said town has the appropriate size for the item.
And yes, it is much more difficult to find a town with a fully equipped laboratory where you can remain undisturbed for weeks and months to forge that ring of freedom of movement.

1) I never claimed it was hard to find a magic shop. It is very easy to find them. That is a basic premise of the rules.

2) It is actually very very very easy to craft items, you do not need a laboratory at all. See the line: "Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items." And "But the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit."

A short list of places that one can craft are: Any Town ever. In the woods if you feel like it. In side a Rope Trick or MMM.


And what btw makes you think that the fighter will get that 8,325 Greatsword +2 more easily than a monk getting his 450 gp 5-charge Bull's strength wand?
The ONLY parameter delivered by the DMG rules for item availability IS THE PRICE! Nothing else.

Actually, another parameter is: Being an Item. Since a 5 charge wand is not a specific item in the DMG, and cannot be created, it cannot be found at any magic shop.


And I said dozens of times already - that fluff of magic mart including partially charged items may not be to everyone's liking, but it is what the rules assume. Change the fluff, if you like.

Actually, as has been explained to you a number of times that i have read, no magic shop anywhere has even a single wand with less then maximum charges unless you give it to them first. As a DM I might be nice and let them have spent charge wands of various spells that nobody wants like fireball, but that's me houseruling, since wands with less then full charges aren't actual items.

[Severedevil]

A couple of the rules you're assuming, Sir Giacomo, concern me especially. The first is the partially charged wands. (Surprise!) The second is the assumed ability to flurry in a grapple, which requires impressive contortions to treat as valid. (The FAQ listing referenced is nonspecific enough to be useless.)

If you can buy nearly-empty wands however you like them, as you assert, then why use scrolls? One-use wands are 40% cheaper and easier to UMD if you can't cast the spell. Emptied wands are just better, so no one buys scrolls to cast from - scrolls only exist when casters scribe them for personal use (still scarcely cheaper than wands) or to add spells to a spell book... in your house-ruled setting, spells in wand form don't have to be bought in bulk. Scrolls are worthless for spells of levels 1-4.

Of course, what really happens is that wands with very few charges are snapped up by adventurers like yourself, who realize that they're a much better deal for their charges because you only have to buy the number of charges you actually want. As a consequence, either wands of few charges cost more per charge, or are rarely in stock. (The former contradicts the DMG, so in strict core we should find the latter. There's an obvious scarcity since it's a resource you can't actually make). Remember, 90% of a wand's use takes place when it has more than five charges, and they can't be made that way. It's got to be at least an order of magnitude harder to find than an ~full wand of its level. Your monk will have to invest in dimensional transport so he can visit Sigil's Used Wand Emporium if he wants access to emptied wands at will and at DMG market price.


Now, regarding flurrying in a grapple... the rules allow a full attack's worth of grapple actions, and flurry bolsters the full attack, so you argue the monk gets to flurry in the grapple. Do I have this right?

There are a few problems with this - most notably the very explicit grapple rules:

If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.Your base attack bonus is unequivocally distinct from your Flurry of Blows attack bonus. There's even a separate table for each. Allowing one to be substituted for another is a house rule, since the text did not say "if you are allowed multiple attacks" or something of that ilk. If a Flurry of Blows, which is a non-BAB full attack routine, is allowed then in a grapple, then logically any full attack routine should be allowed, unless it requires weapons unusable in grapple. So now we have TWF grapples, and full natural attack routines performed as grapple checks. Ewww...

Another rules inconsistency lies in the text of Flurry - a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons. I think we can assume that touch attacks are included, so I don't mind a Flurry of attempts to start a grapple (possibly what the FAQ entry refers to, but more likely it's simply drivel), but a grapple check is explicitly separate from an unarmed strike. So the only consistent use of Flurry of Blows in-grapple is to make attacks at -4 with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon... never to make grapple checks. (And even this is in contravention of the construction of the grapple rules.)

Finally, for logic's sake... I can't use a Flurry of Blows while wearing lightweight, comfortable armor designed for only very mild obstruction to my freedom of movement. I certainly can't flurry while wearing a half-ton troll.

[Rashmi]

The rules for partially charged wands are found in the MiC, but they only allow 10 or 20 charges, not 5.

A) NPCs

B) Non-Core, if Gia can have partial wands that means Wizards get Incantatrix.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

In response to Giacomo's complaints about creating magic items, I have to point out that it is perfectly viable to craft during an adventure. I rarely spend more than 8 hours a day actually moving and fighting, spend 8 hours sleeping, and then have 8 more for crafting. Why do we sit for 8+ hours? Because after 4 encounters, no one has any HP or cure spells left, so it's safer just to camp than to press on. And the fighter rarely complains about taking the mage's share of camp chores, after all, that Cloak of Resistance is going to be his when he finishes.

[Idea Man]

Let's see, it is possible to purchase partially charged wands at character creation. Therefore, at character creation, it is possible to have exactly the wands you want (especially in a theoretical build).

Partially charged wands exist in treasure hoards, which may be sold if undesired. Partially charged wands are occasionally sold by the wizards/sorcerers that made them who have no need of them anymore. A partially charged wand should be available for purchase in a town large enough to support those kinds of purchases (especially in a theoretical situation). Any particular wand is available at the DM's discretion, and the number of charges will be determined by him/her, not the player.

On Flurry of Blows/Grappling:


Finally, for logic's sake... I can't use a Flurry of Blows while wearing lightweight, comfortable armor designed for only very mild obstruction to my freedom of movement. I certainly can't flurry while wearing a half-ton troll.

I like this point. :smallbiggrin:

As far as resting, only pompous or paranoid mages hide in another dimension to sleep all of the time. I know the favorite hideaway spell of the mage in my games crafts a cute little cottage, very tough, but not invincible, and keeps the party from being miserable in rain/snow storms. Great for travelling, moderate level, and a reasonable use of resources at almost any level.

Being interrupted while resting doesn't happen often enough to be a detraction from the wizard class. It the exception, rather than the rule. Personally, I find my party is loath to spend time in any one location, so they were never not travelling or adventuring to craft anything, but not everyone plays our way.

[Talic]

And this is exaclty how different to a joker monk that
- will provide many more sneaking abilities to the rogue in the groupSituational. Not backed up by showing HOW.

- will take out the opponent caster who buffed vs the party spellcaster attacksHIGHLY situational. Also, will not take out the opponent caster who is buffed against party. Disagree if you like. You're wrong.

- will grapple a troll trying to attack the fighter tackling your example giantAs the wizard can use a Wall of Force to similar effect, and STILL be able to act on following rounds.

- will use UMD to provide secondary party healing buff up the cleric's healing power for the day?As opposed to the wizard buying the cleric a couple extra wands, and having a potion for emergencies? That way, the cleric can use those healing wands, just as the monk does, also without a single skill point invested, or feat taken?

How does a wizard "let the party do their job" when he does an area spell effect, and the monk is detrimental to the party when he uses an area effect?Wait? What AoE spell did I suggest the wizard use? Though the wizard CAN do such tactics with Mastery of Shaping PrC feature of the Archmage which he can qualify for. Monk, unfortunately, cannot do that.

This is the problem with your double standard arguing. You are pointing "Synergy" to a wizard casting ray of enfeeblement, whereas a monk using his classabilities is considered useless, not contributing, running down only his wbl whereas I showed many, many times, with rules and examples, that it is not so.What class ability is the monk using, when he uses a wand of XXX? Really? Show me one place in the entire Monk entry where the skill required to use that is listed. UMD IS NOT A MONK CLASS FEATURE. IT IS A UNIVERSAL FEATURE AVAILABLE TO ALL CLASSES. Other monk skills, whether they be greater movement, higher touch AC, slightly better saves (+2 at low levels, scaling to a max of +6 at the highest levels), bonus feats, improved unarmed damage, greater number of attacks... These are valid arguments for the monk. However, ANY CLASS IN THE GAME CAN ACHIEVE A +19 TO UMD AT THE LEVELS YOUR MONK DOES. Classes that get it as a class skill can do it earlier, for less resources spent.
This is the fundamental flaw in your reasoning. LogicNinja's guide is essentially, "The wizard as a team player". And, when a wizard is like that? He is never a hindrance to a party, and is not treating the party as a "doormat". Because he's not trying to steal the show. If he has to rest, it's so he can help the party do what they do better.

WHAT? Quite a few people around use the logicninja guide to argue that wizards are uber, full of combinations there is little to do against, can take on above their level CR single-handedly, in WoTC they post annoying stuff like "guide to GOD", completely looking down on people even trying to play something non-wizardly. And you are telling me here that this will not lead to a wizard trying to steal the show?I am trying to tell you that the point of the logic ninja guide is to use the wizard in a manner that makes him most effective. This is done by NOT wasting spells on things other people can do without them, and saving those spells for the things that the party cannot do. This makes the wizard more effective. While it's true that wizards create many offensive options that are not available to other classes, the basic premise of logic ninja's guide is to avoid spells that duplicate tasks other classes can do, such as HP damage. If others wish to make that into something else, it's all well and good, but it's not logicninja's guide, and it's not my argument. Take it up with them.

A lot of this thread's existence and length stems from the problem that a lot of people exactly believe THAT. That the wizard class is way better than the monk class - you said so yourself. And now said wizard is more powerful, but not stealing the show? Really.Yes. More powerful = better. It is possible to be more powerful, without stealing the show. You can empower everyone, do the impossible, and still leave every other role with a chance to shine.

We are of the same opinioin when it comes to interpreting the logic ninja guide to wizards as something highly useful. But I would never conclude that this makes the monk class underpowered as you would.Logicninja's guide is not what I use to conclude that the monk is underpowered. The Class SRD entries is all I need for that. Other classes do what you're trying to do better and more reliably than the monk. Your guide ventures into rules ambiguities, and plain unsupported assertations, in an effort to validate wand use at low levels. The design of a wand is to make magic more economical for spells you will find yourself using a lot. It is written as such. It is NOT designed to allow a character to bargain basement a discount spell list. Thrift Shop spellcasting is NOT as effective as actual casters, not as viable, and not as logically sound.
You show a grasp of the technicalities of polymorph, and not the nuances. You don't polymorph for supernatural abilities. There are numerous extraordinary attacks that non-animals have, whether it's rend (troll), massive number of attacks (hydra), or what have you. These are all abilities that animals don't get, which makes polymorph a much more flexible spell.

Er...pounce? Rake? Poison? All available also for animal forms. And the hydra is a very special case, with massive number of attacks obtained at the expense of a low move (so how is it ever going to land its full attack? Hydras are often guardian monsters that are staying in one place, attacking everyone coming near - not a great pc adventurer option). A RAW case could even be made by a strict DM that since the ability is not listed as part of the extraordinary attack and racial abilities, the morphed creature will not get it. No, you used exactly the right word: nuances. The differences between the resulting powers those abilities bestow are only nuances. And wildshape is even around much longer, undispellable.Pounce is a valid useful ability. Rake, not so much, as it's situational, and usually tied to the grapple mechanic, which stacks against even druids rather quickly. Further, poison is largely underpowered against most foes, is generally tied to vermin, and when tied to animals, is tied to forms with limited combat effectiveness. Polymorph allows a wider selection of sizes. Further, polymorph changes your creature type, allowing you to gain the base qualities of several creature types, which include the ability to be immune to critical hits, and the like. FURTHER, polymorph allows any form that wild shape can change into, and Shapechange allows far more. As for limited mobility of a hydra? By the time a wizard/sorceror hits level 9, he should be able to have an Overland Flight spell up for 9 hours a day easy. That mostly mitigates the Movement restriction of the Hydra. Moving on.

Schroedinger's Blah. I listed not 10 posts prior to yours WHY limited use wands are not feasible. You argue both sides of a coin to get it, both for and against internal consistency. As for other things? It's quite possible, and plausible for you to have issues with things such as permanent enlarge. One well placed dispel magic just cost you 3k gold. There are limitations to being large, such as squeezing limitations on space, lowered AC (-2, 1 for size, 1 for dex), and more. Keeping permanent enlarge is a BAD idea. Makes you easier to hit, limits where you can go, all for what? A bit more damage, and a bonus on grappling.

As for Schroedinger's blah:
HAs it ever occured to you in the analysis you provide above, that when the DMG offers detailed rules on how to price partially charged wands, as opposed to the value of the king's private letters, this may have something to do with the general use in game as part of the equipment?You mean, in the same place it says you may buy them at character creation for levels above level 1? Tell me, where exactly does it say you may buy partially charged wands otherwise?

As for permanencied grapple not a great idea:
I think the instances where being large is of prohibitive disadvanatage are quite rare. Then, the risk of being targeted by a dispel magic is present, but in some cases/settings the permanencied enlarge can be of huge advantage. For instance, in the grappling contest you run (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82831) and where the monk class is currently impressively showcasing its grappling power.True. Permanencied Enlarge does net a +5 bonus to grapple. As well as -4 to hide checks. As well as -2 to AC. As well as -4 to attack and AC in any 5' wide passageway. Now, let's compare the frequency we see a 5' wide passageway with, say, casters that are buffed to take out wizards. :smallamused:

Horn of fog. 10x10 cubes are not effective concealment, ESPECIALLY when you're a 10x10 creature. Multiple rounds would have to be used to duplicate a single level 1 spell.

The Horn of Fog creates an effect similar to an obscuring mist spell in the round it is activated (20ft radius), and will then continue to create 10ft cubes in every round played afterwards (important, for instance, when the horn user moves or the fog is dispersed by wind, or the fog moves on due to the propulsion of the horn).
SRD (bold emphasis mine): This small bugle allows its possessor to blow forth a thick cloud of heavy fog similar to that of an obscuring mist spell. The fog covers a 10-foot square next to the horn blower each round that the user continues to blow the horn; fog clouds travel 10 feet each round in a straight line from the emanation point unless blocked by something substantial such as a wall. The device makes a deep, foghorn-like noise, with the note dropping abruptly to a lower register at the end of each blast. The fog dissipates after 3 minutes. A moderate wind (11+ mph) disperses the fog in 4 rounds; a strong wind (21+ mph) disperses the fog in 1 round. The first line outlines that the clouds are similar to the clouds in the Obscuring Mist spell. Similar does not equal identical. Following lines outline differences. So, the fog has the same visibility of Obscuring Mist. Any round the horn is blown, by the 2nd line, it creates a 10x10 block of fog (as opposed to 20 foot radius cloud of obscuring mist). These clouds persist for 3 minutes (as opposed to duration of Obscuring mist). These clouds move in a straight line at a rate of 10 feet per round, away from point of origin, as opposed to the stationary effect of obscuring mist. Easy enough.

As for your barbarian idea? LOL. You're trying to make the monk into a diet-batman. Logicninja's guide has the wizard as the one who can drop an enlarge on the barbarian (or a ray of enfeeblement on his foe, etc). The wizard does this without a single item, and if he needs supplementary uses, can also get the wands, and use them, without a single skill point or feat invested, simply by virtue of being a wizard. Thus, you are spending your finite resources, finite skills, and finite feats to do what the wizard does for free... And you can't imagine a better way to do it?

First of all, skills and feats are not finite, but permanent.
Then, why will batman all of a sudden want to sacrifice the buff round and not become invisible, but rather buff the barbarian with an enlarge spell? I sense inconsistencies here. Part of the UMD joker monk tactics was developed to make non-casters not too reliant on caster buffs and here you say, but yes, of course batman will help everyone else first. Rachel Lorelei will have you for this...:smallbiggrin:If you have a limited amount of something, it is finite. For example, a level 1 human wizard with an 18 intelligence will have 28 skill points. Period. He must use that limited (i.e. FINITE) resource to gain permanent abilities with skills. Now, a wizard won't need to have any of those invested in UMD to use a wand of Enlarge Person, by virtue of his class abilities (spellcasting).

Then, the monk for instance uses stealth and thus without recourse to a spell or item does something where the wizard needs a spell (invisibility, and even only 1 min/lvl). Does this again mean the wizard is useless? Stealth has many restrictions and limitations. For example, if you are in the middle of a 30' long, 5' wide corridor, and a guard enters the corridor at the other end, you have no cover or concealment, and thus, cannot hide. Second, you are trying to pigeonhole the wizard into trying to do exactly what the monk is doing. HE WON'T. Ask a rogue to kill a troll, and he's likely to use flanking to do sneak attacks. Ask a barbarian, and he's likely to use power attack and 2 handed weapons. Both will kill the troll, granted. Now, if you start saying the rogue is better because when the barbarian flanks, he doesn't get bonus damage, you are trying to make the barbarian do the task the same way the rogue would. That's not feasible. Solutions with a wizard usually rely on creative use of a wide array of abilities. Forcing him to get around a problem the exact same way a monk would limits that creativity, and is a cheap and meaningless attempt to make the caster seem weaker than he is.

And maintaining that I cannot imagine a better way to make use of a wand of enlarge is just polemics.
Basically, you are ridiculing a good idea for an ADDITIONAL WAY ON TOP OF ALL OTHERS to use the buff round only to avoid admitting that there is any good in the guide or even joker monk concept. This is really desperate.I am ridiculing nothing. I am pointing out a lot of inconsistencies, and flaws, and other problems in your ideas, and you are responding with misleading and inaccurate rebuttals. As for the idea of the "buff round"?? Doesn't usually exist. Usually, spells are cast as they can be, in the middle of combat. If the permanent enlarged monk that's hiding at a -4 (to duplicate that feeble Invisibility spell) moves into a grapple with the troll, he has now obligated himself to do nothing else as long as he wishes to occupy the troll. When the wizard sets up a wall of force? Next round he's fully available to do anything he likes. Troll is still not in the fight.

[Midnight_v]

{Scrubbed}

[Rawhide]

This thread has reached over 50 pages and is being closed. A new one may be created immediately by the original creator.