PDA

View Full Version : Why Does Everyone Say Monks Are Bad?



Pages : [1] 2 3

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 11:45 AM
I tried doing a search, but it just brought up lost of posts saying Monks are underpowered without saying why.

I do not want to hear anything about unarmed swordsage or anything related to ToB. Just about anything is underpowered compared to those classes.

MAD makes no sense because Clerics (WIS and CHA) also have it, but everyone agrees they are powerful. You can build a Monk focusing on just 2 abilities.

Some of their abilities aren't useful in combat/dungeons, but D&D is an RPG, not a shooter or strategy game.

Morty
2008-11-08, 11:46 AM
Oh, a monk thread. Is this that time of a week?
*Buys popcorn*

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-08, 11:50 AM
Oh, a monk thread. Is this that time of a week?
*Buys popcorn*

It has been over a month since the last one.

Vortling
2008-11-08, 11:51 AM
Oh, a monk thread. Is this that time of a week?
*Buys popcorn*

They've been slowing down. It's only happened once or twice this month. *sets up lawn chairs*

However, I must say this. Full casters are much much more powerful than ToB classes. IE, Wizard, Druid, Sorcerer, Cleric, Favored Soul, Psion (if you use them), etc. If you wish for a full dissertation on why ToB is not overpowered I or someone else can certainly give you one.

Morty
2008-11-08, 11:52 AM
It has been over a month since the last one.

It's about time, then.


If you wish for a full dissertation on why ToB is not overpowered I or someone else can certainly give you one.

Probably at least five someones.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-08, 11:54 AM
A monk has lower AC, HP, BAB and damage potential than a fighter (already one of the weakest classes), while requiring much higher stats to be effective. Most of monk class features have no synergy, and many of them sound cool on paper but are useless in actual gameplay (wow, Timeless Body!).

That's in a nutshell.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 11:56 AM
I tried doing a search, but it just brought up lost of posts saying Monks are underpowered without saying why.

I do not want to hear anything about unarmed swordsage or anything related to ToB. Just about anything is underpowered compared to those classes.

MAD makes no sense because Clerics (WIS and CHA) also have it, but everyone agrees they are powerful. You can build a Monk focusing on just 2 abilities.

Some of their abilities aren't useful in combat/dungeons, but D&D is an RPG, not a shooter or strategy game.

Clerics aren't MAD (multiple Ability Dependency). I don't think you even know what this term means:
Dependency does'nt mean:
"Well, these other stats besides Primary might be nice."
No, MAD means you need them to even function close to your role (spellcasting for Cleric).

Monks: Need Wisdom for AC (sincecan't wear armor for 1/2 their abilities to work), Str to hit (can be subbed for Weapon Finesse so using Dex but than damage won't be very good), and possibly Dex for more AC.
So you need 3 primary Stats: Str, Wis, Dex.

They might be considered DAD (duo Ability Dependency), but even that is stretching the terms.

I mean, look at them:
Cha just a nice benefit, but nothing required. Turn Undead is rarely worth it unless you specialize in it (multple feats required or take certain Prc for it).
Wis: needed for spellcasting.

Compare to Favored Soul:
Actually needs Wis and Cha to cast spells on enemies: One is DC and other is highest spell you can cast like cleric.

Clerics are not MAD and they certainly aren't your DAD.

Now Monks:
1) Mind telling me what is good about them?

2) How their abilities even close to synergy (Full attack to flurry and I get movement bonus...wait you can't even move much to full attack...)?

3) Cleric Bab and no Divine Power or Wildshape or Sneak attack? How does that even work?

Answer those and you will reach enlightenment about this issue (but only this issue; I don't give out enlightenment freely).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 12:00 PM
Monk issues: Poor BAB, no way to improve it
Poor AC, even Wizards can get more protection than Monks for less investment
Poor HD, between this, the BAB, and the AC they can't effectively be on the front lines
MAD, they need Str, Wis, Con, Dex(Clerics can use 4 attributes but can get by as SAD as a Wiz)
Poor skill points(only 2 more than the Cleric) meaning they can't skillmonkey
Lots of abilities focused on movement(speed boosts, tumble, dim door) and a primary attack focused on standing still
No worthwhile weapon proficiencies(at low levels their base weapon damage is nil and at high levels it doesn't matter
A lot of abilities that duplicate low-level spells that they get at very high levels
Abilities focused on surviving alone, which is useless in a party

Bayar
2008-11-08, 12:01 PM
See, Monks are more MAD than Clerics. While Clerics require only a high Wis to be at all effective. Everything else complements the build.

Monks are different. They are melee fighters. But they specialise in using only a couple of weapons, and gain class abilities that are more focused on unarmed combat.

Since they cant use armor or shields, they need a high DEX score. WIS boosts their AC, but it is just another score to boost. They need a decent score in STR to hit anything. And a good CON to have more HP.

To be fair, I prefere to play a Ninja rather than a Monk.

Dervag
2008-11-08, 12:02 PM
A few objections I have heard:

- To be effective in combat, the monk needs to use several ability stats; to be good he needs high modifiers in all those stats. It is unreasonable to expect a character to have more than one or two very good stats. If only two good stats are needed (as with the cleric), things may work out well enough. But if you need three or four good ability scores to be successful, there's a problem.

- The monk's low hit dice make her vulnerable to melee combatants, who usually have a fairly high Attack Bonus and will be able to hit her often enough for hit point totals to be a concern.

- The monk's unarmed damage is inferior to the armed damage of armed melee combatants in many classes, assuming that both the monk and the armed combatant have equally good character builds.

- Statistically, the monk's ability to deliver a Flurry of Blows does not offset inferior damage output, because the monk suffers reduced hit probability.

- Thus, the monk is likely to be an inferior melee combatant. Since the monk has no spells and is not especially powerful with ranged weapons, this means that the monk does not have a very useful combat role.

- Since combat is a major part of D&D, inability to perform in combat is a major weakness of the character class, from a practical standpoint.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 12:11 PM
M0rt, Tippy, you can be helpful and post links, rather than being immature. I already said I did a search.


However, I must say this. Full casters are much much more powerful than ToB classes. IE, Wizard, Druid, Sorcerer, Cleric, Favored Soul, Psion (if you use them), etc. If you wish for a full dissertation on why ToB is not overpowered I or someone else can certainly give you one.

Point taken. I don't compare melee to pure casters because, as you said, pure casters do come out ahead.


A monk has lower AC,

As best I can tell, RAW don't forbid enchanting Monk's robes as armor.


HP, BAB

Both are the same as a Cleric.


while requiring much higher stats to be effective.

Cleric requires WIS of at least 19, but even that is low because saves will be low. A Monk's WIS and STR/DEX (depending on build) can be raised using items. (Not to say any class can't raise their stats, just saying that stats are limiting for every class. Most pure casters have it easier since they can focus on just 1.)


Most of monk class features have no synergy, and many of them sound cool on paper but are useless in actual gameplay (wow, Timeless Body!).

Which is a 17th level ability - higher than many campaigns ever get.

What about (Improved) Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body, and Diamond Body?


Clerics aren't MAD (multiple Ability Dependency). I don't think you even know what this term means:
Dependency does'nt mean:
"Well, these other stats besides Primary might be nice."
No, MAD means you need them to even function close to your role (spellcasting for Cleric).

One of the things that makes Cleric powerful is DMM, which requires turning. Number of turns is based on CHA. Also, several Cleric spells give bonuses based on CHA modifier.


Monks: Need Wisdom for AC (sincecan't wear armor for 1/2 their abilities to work), Str to hit (can be subbed for Weapon Finesse so using Dex but than damage won't be very good), and possibly Dex for more AC.
So you need 3 primary Stats: Str, Wis, Dex.

You need 2. WIS and either DEX or STR. (I prefer STR since, as you said, using DEX lowers damage.)


1) Mind telling me what is good about them?

I addressed a few of them above. Also higher damage than any weapon, with gloves to enchantable like weapons. Same number of attacks (with no penalty once you get to 11th level), more if you dual-wield. (Though I concede that negates the higher fist damage.)


2) How their abilities even close to synergy (Full attack to flurry and I get movement bonus...wait you can't even move much to full attack...)?

What?


Monk issues: Poor BAB, no way to improve it

Same with Rogues and Bards.


Poor AC, even Wizards can get more protection than Monks for less investment

Enchanted Monk robes.


Poor HD, between this, the BAB, and the AC they can't effectively be on the front lines

All are the same as a Rogue (HD are better), and Rogues survive just fine.


Poor skill points(only 2 more than the Cleric) meaning they can't skillmonkey

And..? Fighters suck as skillmonkeys, but no one said they are supposed to be skillmonkeys.


Lots of abilities focused on movement(speed boosts, tumble, dim door) and a primary attack focused on standing still

No conflict there. A Monk can get to that pure caster in the back who is tormenting your Fighter, then move around to help the Rogue flank, then move elsewhere. Once you get a few levels, no enemy is going to go down in one round anyway.


A lot of abilities that duplicate low-level spells that they get at very high levels

With no need to take a round casting a spell. Besides, are you saying low-level spells are useless?


Abilities focused on surviving alone, which is useless in a party

And survival is bad why?

derfenrirwolv
2008-11-08, 12:20 PM
Its because they're rather bardesque, they don't excell at any one particular area but they do several things fairly well.

Damage: WAY below what a two handed sword weilding fighter can do, and below what a 1 handed sword+shield can do. This is mostly from their base attack bonus being at 2/3. Another problem with the classes ability to do damage is that their major class feature is the ability to run around the battlefield unhindered, but their flurry of blows ability requires them to stand still.

Their damage also tends not to scale well as you level up. Sure, they go from d 6 to d10 damage, but by that point the warrior is swinging around a +3 shocking flaming burst sword. New magic items worn as fist weapons have helped this somewhat


Defence: Armor is Better than anyone except for the fighter, or mayby barbarian but the d8's make playing meatshield a little dicey.

Skills: Very good. jump, tumble, move silently and hide... all of the combat related ones. What they lack is a rogues trapfinding abilies (trapfinding +search) , or they'd be able to replace the party rogue fairly handily.


So what ARE they good for?

Pretty much the same thing a rogue is good for in combat. Moderate damage, but the benefit is that they can controll where the damage is dealt. A monk can tumble past the front line of mooks and get to the rear, harrasing vulnerable spellcasters or setting up flanks. This and the best saves in the game, evasion, and magic resistance make them great wizard killers. Most big bad guys at the end of dungeon are casters of some sort, run past his guards and throw him in a headlock for some beatdown fun.

Spiryt
2008-11-08, 12:20 PM
M0rt, Tippy, you can be helpful and post links, rather than being immature. I already said I did a search.

It was pretty ineffective one then. Although indeed there wasn't thread like that in a while.



Both are the same as a Cleric.


Divine Power (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/divinePower.htm)

And that's only about BAB, beacuse in AB as whole cleric will beat Monk by miles.

Bayar
2008-11-08, 12:20 PM
A Monk's WIS and STR/DEX (depending on build) can be raised using items. (Not to say any class can't raise their stats, just saying that stats are limiting for every class. Most pure casters have it easier since they can focus on just 1.)


The same thing could be said about fighters/rangers/barbarians.

What would you choose ? A monk because he can do crazy martial arts moves but wont actually contribute to the party in any way because he hardly does damage or gets stabbed a lot ? or a hulking barbarian that flies into a rage and eviscerates everything, ignoring the pain from the wounds that enemies can inflict easier ?

Really, if you wanna play a monk, play a ninja. Level 2 gets invisibility for 1 round that does not dissapear when he attacks, a weaker version of Sneak attack that synergises well with the overall stealth of the character, still MAD as hell.



Oh, and level 1 kobolds (no, not Pun Pun) get stuff that monks get at level 17 (IIRC).







Yeah, I am implying that kobold ninja's with dragonwrought, a score of 20 in DEX and WIS, with mage armor as their innate spell and using ranged attack to send their opponents into oblivion are Kickass.

FMArthur
2008-11-08, 12:21 PM
http://www.rlhdesign.net/images/Tarrasque.jpg

Fear the Monk Thread!

AmberVael
2008-11-08, 12:21 PM
A comparison on ability scores and their use in the Cleric and Monk classes.

-Clerics-

Wisdom for spellcasting
Charisma for turning/rebuking

Str, Dex, Con, and Int for typical uses, and are not necessarily a focus for a Cleric.

Clerics are mainly focused around spellcasting, though some clerics will want to be melee hogs too. A melee cleric will need a good focus in Con, but they can sacrifice a little of their Wis due to not needing high DCs (as they will target themselves with spells). Strength with come from their spells. As such, a melee cleric needs a minor focus in strength, and moderate focus in wisdom and constitution.

-Monks-

Strength for damage and attack bonus.
Dexterity for Armor class
Con for hit points.
Wisdom for armor class, quivering palm, stunning fist

Monks are much more focused on combat, so physical stats are quite a bit more important to them than they would likely be for a Cleric. Dexterity and Wisdom cannot be skimped, because they are your only real source of armor class outside of magic. Constitution augments your substandard combatant HP, so you really can't neglect it, and Strength makes it so you can actually hit people with your substandard attack bonus.
As such:
Major focus in strength, major focus in wisdom and con, and moderate focus in dexterity.

Now keep in mind that if you want your monk to be more of a skilled person, you'll want to focus on intelligence as well, to supplement your substandard skill points.

All in all, look through my summary and you'll notice why the monk isn't considered good. They don't have a focus, and in a party oriented game, where each person picks up a lot of the load, that's bad. Furthermore, their abilities don't even work together, or have substantial power anyways. What is the point of getting more attacks when it is nearly impossible to hit with them? What is the point getting armor class bonuses when you're not actually getting an armor class higher than a normal class's bonus (since you can't wear armor? And trust me, I've done the math- a monk has to spend way too much money to actually have an impressive armor class bonus). What is the point of having a lot of skills to pick from when you have few points to spend on them?

You can go on like that for a while.

Mephit
2008-11-08, 12:22 PM
I'll try giving some more constructive explanations.

Monks aren't completely useless. They can be a help in battle and outside of it. They main problem is just that compared to most other classes, it's a suboptimal choice.
Why? Because when the class's creators made the class decent in pretty much everything, they actually forgot making it good in something. It's got d8 HD, 3/4 BAB, so it's not an optimal meleer. Skills isn't it's best part either. Ok, it's got fast movement. But then again, there's a lot of spells and feats that can duplicate that, and it's not a constant advantage in battle like a fighter's bonus feats or other class features.
Many of it's features are situational, such as slow fall and purity of body, and some are downright useless. (Once a week? Really?)



MAD makes no sense because Clerics (WIS and CHA) also have it, but everyone agrees they are powerful. You can build a Monk focusing on just 2 abilities.

A monk that wants to stand its own in combat - and that's just in combat - will need:
High Str - You'll need the extra damage output on your unarmed strikes, and to offset the penalties for your mediocre BAB
High Dex - With a 16 in Wis and Dex, you'll still only have an AC of 16 at 1st level.
High Con - D8 HD means mediocre HP.
High Wis - Again, AC.



As best I can tell, RAW don't forbid enchanting Monk's robes as armor.

Yeah, but every other character can do the same with their armor. The lower AC stays the same like that. Also, that's not viable until mid-levels.


Both are the same as a Cleric.

Then again, a Cleric is a spellcaster and more specifically, a healer - and on a somwhat larger scale than Wholeness of Body. He can make up for that with spells.
In fact, you said it yourself:

I don't compare melee to pure casters because, as you said, pure casters do come out ahead.


What about (Improved) Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body, and Diamond Body

Evasion is indeed a useful class feature, but the others are both situational, and nothing a spell can't fix (Cure Disease, Poison, etc...)

Edit: Stabbed by Eastern Assassins multiple times, but I don't mind. I got to stab V back. ^^

Tengu_temp
2008-11-08, 12:23 PM
As best I can tell, RAW don't forbid enchanting Monk's robes as armor.


To have the same AC as fighter in full plate, a monk needs to concentrate so much on dexterity and/or wisdom that his damage output will suck ass.



Both are the same as a Cleric.


Clerics have awesome self-buffs, including Divine Power which increases both their BAB and HP. Monks don't.



Cleric requires WIS of at least 19, but even that is low because saves will be low. A Monk's WIS and STR/DEX (depending on build) can be raised using items. (Not to say any class can't raise their stats, just saying that stats are limiting for every class. Most pure casters have it easier since they can focus on just 1.)

A melee cleric doesn't need wisdom above 19 (and can raise it to that level with items, depending on how your DM interprets spell level requirements) - who cares about save DCs? Clerics are buffers, not offensive casters.



Which is a 17th level ability - higher than many campaigns ever get.

What about (Improved) Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body, and Diamond Body?

Evasion is good. Still Mind is a very situational, low bonus. Purity of Body and Diamond Body are mostly useless - since when have you played a game where disease and/or poison had large impact? Not to mention that both of these abilities can be replicated by spells.

The stuff you listed are perfect examples of abilities I had in mind - look good on paper, do not matter in actual gameplay.

Tokiko Mima
2008-11-08, 12:25 PM
Look at one of their level 20 abilities: Slow Fall any distance. A 1st level wizard or sorcerer can replicate that feat, simply by knowing Feather Fall. Feather Fall is actually even better, because it can be used on multiple targets in the party, and doesn't require a nearby wall to work. Virtually all their class abilities are like this to a lesser degree.

They have a dimension door spell, but it's limited CL .5 * Monk level. Their spell resistance is not as good as you get from most spell resistant races, like Drow. To use quivering palm (once a week! ) you need to make both a melee attack roll, and the foe must fail a saving throw. The list goes on and on, but the result is the same: the monk is dramatically weaker on paper than most other 3.5 classes (excepting Samurai, Soulknife, and Truenamer who each have similiar advancement problems.)

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 12:25 PM
Both are the same as a Cleric.But the Cleric has personal-range buffs that raise them. The Monk doesn't.
Cleric requires WIS of at least 19, but even that is low because saves will be low. A Monk's WIS and STR/DEX (depending on build) can be raised using items. (Not to say any class can't raise their stats, just saying that stats are limiting for every class. Most pure casters have it easier since they can focus on just 1.)A Cleric requires one good stat. A Monk requires 3-4.
Which is a 17th level ability - higher than many campaigns ever get.

What about (Improved) Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body, and Diamond Body?None make the class good. They make it a bit more survivable, but that's not the same as good. A class that is just survivable is only good for escaping TPKs, it's useless for preventing them in the first place. Guess which is better from the PoV of a team. And most of those don't even make it very survivable. Diseases are worthless if you have a 5th level Cleric, Still Mind is a minor boost against one of the less-used schools, and Poisons are almost never used due to the cost.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-08, 12:26 PM
Point taken. I don't compare melee to pure casters because, as you said, pure casters do come out ahead.
Then don't make the statement in the first place. :smallwink:


As best I can tell, RAW don't forbid enchanting Monk's robes as armor.
The best you can do is a straight armor bonus, you can't put things like heavy fortification on robes.



Both are the same as a Cleric.
No they aren't. The cleric can heal himself with spells, effectively upping his HP and he has various spells to up his stats and BAB.


Cleric requires WIS of at least 19, but even that is low because saves will be low. A Monk's WIS and STR/DEX (depending on build) can be raised using items. (Not to say any class can't raise their stats, just saying that stats are limiting for every class. Most pure casters have it easier since they can focus on just 1.)
A cleric requires Wis and nothing else. No ASF means they can ware full plate to make up for low dex. Spells can boost Strength (Righteous Might and Divine Power combine for +10 strength). Con is nice but again, healing spells can make up for it.


What about (Improved) Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body, and Diamond Body?

Aren't that great.

streakster
2008-11-08, 12:30 PM
Linky Time! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3871542)

That above should be a simple guide to why the monk is so bad. Also

69 Pages of Proof (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704)

Also features a hilarious guide on how monks are better than wizards.


Also, in addition to being mechanically weak, the Monk is poorly constructed - most of the Monk's abilities do not seem to mesh together into a coherent whole.

"I practice the martial arts! This makes me good against enchantment spells, and able to teleport while talking to squirrels!"

Bayar
2008-11-08, 12:36 PM
69 Pages of Proof (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704)

Also features a hilarious guide on how monks are better than wizards.


Also, in addition to being mechanically weak, the Monk is poorly constructed - most of the Monk's abilities do not seem to mesh together into a coherent whole.

"I practice the martial arts! This makes me good against enchantment spells, and able to teleport while talking to squirrels!"

And we should never start a monk thread that gets a crapload of people banned.

paddyfool
2008-11-08, 12:42 PM
69 Pages of Proof

I like reading that thread. Or, at any rate, the much-edited first post.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-08, 12:43 PM
And we should never start a monk thread that gets a crapload of people banned.

Yet the banning missed the one person who should have been banned...

Morty
2008-11-08, 12:44 PM
And we should never start a monk thread that gets a crapload of people banned.

It is amusing that the first four people to post in this thread after the OP are now banned, indeed.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 12:50 PM
It is amusing that the first four people to post in this thread after the OP are now banned, indeed.

Wait, people were banned on that Thread?

only1doug
2008-11-08, 12:53 PM
Linky Time! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3871542)

That above should be a simple guide to why the monk is so bad. Also

69 Pages of Proof (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704)

Also features a hilarious guide on how monks are better than wizards.
The funniest parts are that it was written by someone who has by his own admission never played a monk and who's key concept of how too make a monk work is to buy partially charged wands and have unlimited opportunity to trigger them by eventually rolling a natural 20.


Also, in addition to being mechanically weak, the Monk is poorly constructed - most of the Monk's abilities do not seem to mesh together into a coherent whole.

"I practice the martial arts! This makes me good against enchantment spells, and able to teleport while talking to squirrels!"

Most people agree that mechanically monks are made of Lose.

all the best monk builds have no more than 1-2 levels of monk in them before dipping other classes for features.

I've actually played a monk, it sucked. I had far more fun when i switched to bard.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 12:56 PM
The funniest parts are that it was written by someone who has by his own admission never played a monk and who's key concept of how too make a monk work is to buy partially charged wands and have unlimited opportunity to trigger them by eventually rolling a natural 20.



Most people agree that mechanically monks are made of Lose.

all the best monk builds have no more than 1-2 levels of monk in them before dipping other classes for features.

I've actually played a monk, it sucked. I had far more fun when i switched to bard.I will admit, Monks have decent levels 1-2. One of the few times losing a Druid level might be worth it. The problem is when you take it past level 2. It's just not worth it.

Morty
2008-11-08, 12:56 PM
Wait, people were banned on that Thread?

No, but it was funny when I saw it nevertheless. Besides, I'm preety certain this thread had its part in banning at least some people.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 01:04 PM
Divine Power (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/divinePower.htm)

Divine Power is 1rd/level. Until 13th level (10th with WIS 18), there is no way to assure you can keep it going for every encounter (assuming the standard 4/day). And that's if you use every 4th level slot for Divine Power.


The same thing could be said about fighters/rangers/barbarians.

Which I said.


or gets stabbed a lot ? or a hulking barbarian that flies into a rage and eviscerates everything, ignoring the pain from the wounds that enemies can inflict easier

And fails every Will save, so spends his combat standing around staring into space rather than swinging that greataxe...


I'll try giving some more constructive explanations.

Monks aren't completely useless. They can be a help in battle and outside of it. They main problem is just that compared to most other classes, it's a suboptimal choice.
Why? Because when the class's creators made the class decent in pretty much everything, they actually forgot making it good in something. It's got d8 HD, 3/4 BAB, so it's not an optimal meleer. Skills isn't it's best part either. Ok, it's got fast movement. But then again, there's a lot of spells and feats that can duplicate that, and it's not a constant advantage in battle like a fighter's bonus feats or other class features.
Many of it's features are situational, such as slow fall and purity of body, and some are downright useless. (Once a week? Really?)

Thank you. This is the kind of info I was looking for.


A monk that wants to stand its own in combat - and that's just in combat - will need:
High Str - You'll need the extra damage output on your unarmed strikes, and to offset the penalties for your mediocre BAB
High Dex - With a 16 in Wis and Dex, you'll still only have an AC of 16 at 1st level.
High Con - D8 HD means mediocre HP.
High Wis - Again, AC.

As I said above, I disagree with CON. Rogues can melee with a d6. Not to say it can be dumped, but it doesn't have to be a main focus. WIS is obviously required, but either STR or DEX can be neglected a little.


Then again, a Cleric is a spellcaster and more specifically, a healer - and on a somwhat larger scale than Wholeness of Body. He can make up for that with spells.

Every point a Monk uses on WoB is one the Cleric can use on someone else. I agree, Monks aren't supposed to be healers.


Evasion is indeed a useful class feature, but the others are both situational, and nothing a spell can't fix (Cure Disease, Poison, etc...)

But both require the spell be prepared or having the potion handy. Ability damage from disease or poison requires another spell to remove. Again, every spell not needed on the Monk can be used on another PC.

They are situational, but so are a lot of other abilities. (A Rogue's SA isn't very useful in a graveyard.)


To have the same AC as fighter in full plate, a monk needs to concentrate so much on dexterity and/or wisdom that his damage output will suck ass.

But not compared to a Ranger in Studded Leather.


Then don't make the statement in the first place. :smallwink:

I thought by mentioning ToB it was clear I was thinking of melee. :smallbiggrin:


The best you can do is a straight armor bonus, you can't put things like heavy fortification on robes.

Is that stated somewhere? (Not asking to be confrontational. I don't know, which is why I am asking.)


No they aren't. The cleric can heal himself with spells, effectively upping his HP and he has various spells to up his stats and BAB.

But every spell a Cleric uses on himself is one spell not usable for the party. It's the same argument that others have made that Monk abilities only focus on survivability. A self-buffing cleric is only focusing on surviving.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 01:09 PM
But every spell a Cleric uses on himself is one spell not usable for the party. It's the same argument that others have made that Monk abilities only focus on survivability. A self-buffing cleric is only focusing on surviving.No, a self-buffing Cleric is focusing on killing stuff. Yes, a Monk can survive, and make it so he requires fewer spell slots from the party Cleric. Is there any reason you wouldn't take a Cleric over him, though?

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 01:15 PM
No, a self-buffing Cleric is focusing on killing stuff. Yes, a Monk can survive, and make it so he requires fewer spell slots from the party Cleric.

That makes no sense. A self-buffing Cleric is killing things, but a Monk isn't?


Is there any reason you wouldn't take a Cleric over him, though?

Because the party already has a cleric?

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-08, 01:19 PM
That makes no sense. A self-buffing Cleric is killing things, but a Monk isn't?

What is confusing about this statement? A Self buffing Cleric is better then a fighter, and therefore also better then a monk.


Because the party already has a cleric?
What, you can only have one character of any class in a party at a time? Okay, substitute Druid for Cleric.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 01:22 PM
Divine Power is 1rd/level. Until 13th level (10th with WIS 18), there is no way to assure you can keep it going for every encounter (assuming the standard 4/day). And that's if you use every 4th level slot for Divine Power.

Scrolls? They are dirt cheap (compared to benefit) by level 7 for the job.




And fails every Will save, so spends his combat standing around staring into space rather than swinging that greataxe...

Barbs get a big Wisdom bonus while raging so they have almost Good Will save.
Let me compare Monk (best can afford is 16 Wis since they are MAD) and Raging Barb (10 Wis since he doesn't focus on it less pretend):

At level 1:
Monk Will save is +5 (good)
Raging Barb: +2 (as good as any Wizard at 1st).
Wizard: +2

Level 5: We assume +2 Cloak of Resistance
Monk: +9
Barb: +5
Wiz: +6

Level 10: Cloak +4
Monk: +16 (can afford a Wisdom +4 item now as well)
Barb: +9
Wiz: +11

Fails every Will save? Not much worse than every Wizard.



As I said above, I disagree with CON. Rogues can melee with a d6. Not to say it can be dumped, but it doesn't have to be a main focus. WIS is obviously required, but either STR or DEX can be neglected a little.

I'll grant you that: everyone needs Con.
Unless undead or something.




They are situational, but so are a lot of other abilities. (A Rogue's SA isn't very useful in a graveyard.)

In Core sure, but in non-core Rogues can deal at least 1/2 damage to undead (Penetrating Strike class feature- I forget what they give up)



But not compared to a Ranger in Studded Leather.

Why would a Ranger wear Studded Leather?

Mithral Chain shirt is only 1100 gold pieces; chump change by 3rd level (and within Wealth per level restrictions of no more than a 1/4th on single item).

Kyeudo
2008-11-08, 01:23 PM
Divine Power is 1rd/level. Until 13th level (10th with WIS 18), there is no way to assure you can keep it going for every encounter (assuming the standard 4/day). And that's if you use every 4th level slot for Divine Power.


1 round a level is still long enough for an entire important fight. Then there is DMM Persist if you want to make the fighter cry.

For anything less important, you've still got the enhancement bonus of your weapon and lesser buff spells like Bull's Strength to get you through.



And fails every Will save, so spends his combat standing around staring into space rather than swinging that greataxe...


Which is why melee classes as a whole lose to Wizards. Still, those classes can do something well other than suceed at saving throws.



Thank you. This is the kind of info I was looking for.


Except he forgot to add that an Expert can be almost as good, as good, or better than the monk in any particular area of expertise.



As I said above, I disagree with CON. Rogues can melee with a d6. Not to say it can be dumped, but it doesn't have to be a main focus. WIS is obviously required, but either STR or DEX can be neglected a little.


The rogue is a fragile damage dealer. He survives by killing things faster than they can kill him. The Monk is just fragile. He survives by running away.



Every point a Monk uses on WoB is one the Cleric can use on someone else. I agree, Monks aren't supposed to be healers.


A well-played Cleric isn't a healer either. Healing in combat is stupid as a general rule and healing outside of combat is cheap.



But both require the spell be prepared or having the potion handy. Ability damage from disease or poison requires another spell to remove. Again, every spell not needed on the Monk can be used on another PC.


The point is that those abilities don't come into play often and when they do they just save the Cleric a couple of spell slots (maybe).



They are situational, but so are a lot of other abilities. (A Rogue's SA isn't very useful in a graveyard.)


That may have been true when 3.5 was released. Now? There are several ways to sneak attack undead and constructs, a few of which are class features.



But not compared to a Ranger in Studded Leather.


And the ranger is a sub-par melee character only made servicable by spells and an animal companion. Your point is?



I thought by mentioning ToB it was clear I was thinking of melee. :smallbiggrin:


When you say everything, people think you mean everything.



Is that stated somewhere? (Not asking to be confrontational. I don't know, which is why I am asking.)


No, but the enchantability of ordinary clothing is going to vary by DM.



But every spell a Cleric uses on himself is one spell not usable for the party. It's the same argument that others have made that Monk abilities only focus on survivability. A self-buffing cleric is only focusing on surviving.

Every combat round the Cleric has to cast a spell on the party is a round in which the party fails at life. They shouldn't need the Cleric's spells to be viable at their party role.

A self-buffing cleric is focusing on destroying the enemy faster. This has the wonderful side-effect of increasing his survivability and that of his party, but the buffs that matter are all directed towards killing things.

Frosty
2008-11-08, 01:36 PM
Why was Nebo and Reel on, Love banned? Jeez, I didn't even notice that. Anyhoo, maybe we should have a STICKY on why Monks suck? Such as, by RAW, they may not have proficiency with their fists (Unarmed could be interpreted as a Simple Weapon) and hence take a -4 penalty?

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 01:46 PM
Here's what I see is wrong with the monk (and remember, this is my opinion):
The monk is a martially oriented class without full base attack. This means that he will hit less than other martially-oriented classes whether due to lower BAB or due to buffs.
The monk does not do anything another class cannot already do better. Spells replicate a lot of the monk's abilities, and those that are not replicated by spells are instead replicated by such mundane things as armor. Slow Fall is replaced by feather fall, a ring of feather falling (which is hella cheap), or a badge of safe landing (even cheaper).
The monk has conflicting abilities. Flurry of Blows and Fast Movement counteract each other. Increased unarmed strike damage and special monk weapons also conflict--either you can get an enchanted siangham, or you can use your fists, which cannot be enchanted without either house-ruling or entering a prestige class that forgoes the rest of your monk leveling (Kensai).
The monk has abilities that don't make sense. Tongue of the Sun and Moon, easily replicable by tongues, comes far too late to be useful and doesn't make much sense anyway.
The monk cannot multiclass or enter most prestige classes without either special DM dispensation or via feat expenditure. He also has a alignment restriction that prevents him from a variety of other abilities and powers.
The monk is textbook MAD: he requires Str for damage (and to-hit, without Weapon Finesse), Dex for AC (since he can't wear armor), Con (for HP), and Wis (for his class features' DCs and for his Wis-to-AC ability).
In order to equal your typical frontline fighter's AC, a monk requires both a high Dex and a high Wis. Even in the instance that a monk does have the required Dex and/or Wis, the fighter will still retain most of his AC when flat-footed. Further, the monk cannot benefit from such armor enhancements as fortification.
Any other character will be better able to make use of treasure and items found over the course of an adventure. Rogues and Bards have Use Magic Device to help them utilize items, while other classes have large swaths of proficiency (including armor proficiency). Spellcasters can utilize scrolls, wands, and staves.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 01:47 PM
Why was Nebo and Reel on, Love banned? Jeez, I didn't even notice that. Anyhoo, maybe we should have a STICKY on why Monks suck? Such as, by RAW, they may not have proficiency with their fists (Unarmed could be interpreted as a Simple Weapon) and hence take a -4 penalty?

Funnily enough Paizo's Pathfinder made sure to include proficiency with unarmed strike because they realized Monks weren't (it is in the Weapons section of the book/PDF).

But yeah, I didn't mention Proficiency problem earlier in the thread because it felt like a kicking a man when he was down (no pun intended).

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-08, 01:52 PM
Here's what I see is wrong with the monk (and remember, this is my opinion):
The monk is a martially oriented class without full base attack. This means that he will hit less than other martially-oriented classes whether due to lower BAB or due to buffs.
Well this isn't automatically a deal breaker (Swordsages, for example, are the same BAB but are usually only making a standard action attack anyways).

Agreed on all the rest of your points.

Oh, did I PM you my assassin base class? I can't remember and I cleared out my outbox a few days back.

InkEyes
2008-11-08, 01:54 PM
Divine Power is 1rd/level. Until 13th level (10th with WIS 18), there is no way to assure you can keep it going for every encounter (assuming the standard 4/day). And that's if you use every 4th level slot for Divine Power.

A few scrolls or a wand will be more than enough to last an entire day of encounters. There's also the possibility of using some DMM persistent cheese. This can easily be achieved once a day with a 10 cha and extra turning. All the feats you need can be gotten by level 6 (assuming the character is human), so you're good to go by the time you hit level 7 and get divine power.



They are situational, but so are a lot of other abilities. (A Rogue's SA isn't very useful in a graveyard.)

Rouges can take a several feats that allow them to sneak attack undead and nonliving monsters. They could also buy a truedeath crystal, or you could substitute trapsense for penetrating strike.

Are there any similar options for a monk that wants to make any of his class abilities more effective outside of their narrow niches?



But every spell a Cleric uses on himself is one spell not usable for the party. It's the same argument that others have made that Monk abilities only focus on survivability. A self-buffing cleric is only focusing on surviving.

Every monster a cleric kills fast is one less monster to inflict damage/status ailments on another player with a slower-killing class (like a monk).

mabriss lethe
2008-11-08, 02:06 PM
The only monk that I've played that was actually fun was Monk 2/Wight8Tattooed Monk X. The majority of the fun came from being able to play a wight.

You've stated that every spell the cleric doesn't need to use on the monk is an advantage. Sure. fair enough. If that's you're best reason for playing a monk, maybe you should consider playing a warlock. Warlocks are even more self sustaining than a monk. DR, Fast healing, better damage output, Can actually hit with said damage, Access to UMD as a class skill and special abilities designed to make the most of UMD to fill in other gaps. The right choice in invocations gives better movement modes, skill boosts, abilities that actually compliment the party in both combat and non-combat roles. Depending on what invocations you use, they can come pretty close to actually be NAD (No Attribute Dependency) They don't even really need Charisma, which is their primary casting attribute.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 02:10 PM
Scrolls? They are dirt cheap (compared to benefit) by level 7 for the job.

But you are still talking about a lot of scrolls over the course of a campaign.


Fails every Will save? Not much worse than every Wizard.

But still worse, and has a greater than 50% chance save to fail a save of DC 20 (which is kind of low for a 10th level save).


In Core sure, but in non-core Rogues can deal at least 1/2 damage to undead (Penetrating Strike class feature- I forget what they give up)

What book is that in?


Why would a Ranger wear Studded Leather?

Mithral Chain shirt is only 1100 gold pieces; chump change by 3rd level (and within Wealth per level restrictions of no more than a 1/4th on single item).

Why would a melee-focused Ranger have that high of a DEX? Why put points into DEX (that the Ranger doesn't need) when they can put it into STR? Chain shirt and Studded Leather come out the same, assuming the wearer has the max DEX.


1 round a level is still long enough for an entire important fight.

Which negates using Divine Power as an argument, if you assume the Cleric is only using it for "important fights."


Then there is DMM Persist if you want to make the fighter cry.

DMM requires turning, which requires CHA. The common argument is that Clerics don't need CHA, so relying on DMM doesn't work. Either a Cleric can use DMM (and needs CHA), or they don't need CHA and can't DMM as much as everyone says.


For anything less important, you've still got the enhancement bonus of your weapon

As do Monks.


and lesser buff spells like Bull's Strength to get you through.

And the Monk probably has a higher STR to start with. And may be wearing a Belt of Giant STR (which doesn't stack with Bull's STR).


Which is why melee classes as a whole lose to Wizards. Still, those classes can do something well other than suceed at saving throws.

Like move to the back and take out the caster? Oh wait, Monks are useless, I forgot.


The rogue is a fragile damage dealer. He survives by killing things faster than they can kill him. The Monk is just fragile. He survives by running away.

Rogues can only kill fast if they get SA. Another place Monks are good - they can move into position for the Rogue to flank.


Healing in combat is stupid

(splort) Please tell me you are kidding. Please. How else is a mid-level Batman supposed to control the battlefield if Batman is dead? (I say Batman since obviously melee classes are worthless compared to Batman.)

Yes, I am being sarcastic. A little.


The point is that those abilities don't come into play often and when they do they just save the Cleric a couple of spell slots (maybe).

Wait, aren't Clerics casters, so shouldn't their spell slots be uses judiciously, as needed? So isn't the idea to allow them to keep their spell slots as much as possible?


And the ranger is a sub-par melee character only made servicable by spells and an animal companion. Your point is?

But Rangers do have spells, meaning they can keep up. So what is your point?


Every combat round the Cleric has to cast a spell on the party is a round in which the party fails at life. They shouldn't need the Cleric's spells to be viable at their party role.

OK, so Clerics are useless. Thanks for admitting that.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 02:22 PM
Why would a melee-focused Ranger have that high of a DEX? Why put points into DEX (that the Ranger doesn't need) when they can put it into STR? Chain shirt and Studded Leather come out the same, assuming the wearer has the max DEX.

Okay, again, why did you say Studded Leather? Why didn't you just say Chain shirt?

+4 AC is better than +3. And if you say Dex will be the same: why go with the weaker armor?


DMM requires turning, which requires CHA. The common argument is that Clerics don't need CHA, so relying on DMM doesn't work. Either a Cleric can use DMM (and needs CHA), or they don't need CHA and can't DMM as much as everyone says.

Libris Mortis book has this magic item called Night Sticks that grants Extra Turning (which stacks with itself) for 4 or 5 K.
Slotless too.


Why did you need Cha again?



Wait, aren't Clerics casters, so shouldn't their spell slots be uses judiciously, as needed? So isn't the idea to allow them to keep their spell slots as much as possible?

At higher levels you rarely run out if used smartly (not wasting them on Monk for example, I kid).

InkEyes
2008-11-08, 02:24 PM
What book is that in?

Dungeonscape, I think.

Break
2008-11-08, 02:29 PM
DMM requires turning, which requires CHA. The common argument is that Clerics don't need CHA, so relying on DMM doesn't work. Either a Cleric can use DMM (and needs CHA), or they don't need CHA and can't DMM as much as everyone says.

You're right in that DMM requires turning, but it doesn't flat-out require CHA. There are other ways to increase turning attempts - Nightsticks for four extra, or the Extra Turning feat in core for the same amount.

So yes, Clerics really don't need CHA when there are better ways to increase turning attempts.

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-08, 02:35 PM
Kesnit, can you tell me exactly what a monk is meant to do? As in, what does it do that helps a party succeed? And, how does it do this better than another class? Because so far the only thing that I've seen a monk to better than anyone else(that is also useful) is carrying stuff for the party, and getting everyone's bodies away from a TPK so that they can be resurrected.

afroakuma
2008-11-08, 02:39 PM
Kesnit, what are you looking for, exactly? You've been presented with numerous sound arguments as to why monks are considered underpowered in 3.5, and all you continue to do is deny that other classes are more powerful. You've just finished cherrypicking someone's statement to have them "agree" that "clerics are useless." The first thing you said was "what you were looking for" was a comment that began with "monks aren't completely useless."

Are you trying to change our minds about monks, or are you just looking for reassurance that your viewpoint is the correct one?

The most vital points to a monk's being less viable:

• Purity of Body and Diamond Body don't matter. Poisons as a whole are terribly done and a weakly implemented system. If they do make an impact, there is a class that specialized in fixing up people who have been poisoned. Yes, it is a situational spell that not every cleric will have with them. It also happens to not be necessary all that often. One or two backup scrolls can usually clean up all the poison/disease damage for a whole party.

• Flurry of Blows means far less without the full BAB. Being unable to move a reasonable distance and still execute it diminishes its usefulness still further.

• Monks are decent at many things but excel at none. The "unique" abilities they have to counterbalance this are flawed (1/week for quivering palm, as an example)

• Monks have a dead ability: Slow fall. As has been said, a first-level arcane spell trumps this ability in virtually every circumstance.

• A monk's "variety" abilities are often too limited. At 7th level, Wholeness of Body allows the recovery of 14 hit points. It caps at 40. Cure moderate wounds recovers 9-25 hit points to any party member at the same level. Lay on hands is paladin level x Cha bonus, again to any party member, from a melee class with full BAB and a d10 Hit Die. Similarly, one use of dimension door per day is already rendered fairly moot by the monk's own run speed.

• Monks do need MAD. Strength for damage output and/or attack bonus. Dex for AC and/or attack bonus. Con for increased HP to offset being a middling-damage melee character with low AC and a d8 Hit Die. Wis for AC and abilities.

Draco Dracul
2008-11-08, 02:40 PM
Kesnit, can you tell me exactly what a monk is meant to do? As in, what does it do that helps a party succeed? And, how does it do this better than another class? Because so far the only thing that I've seen a monk to better than anyone else(that is also useful) is carrying stuff for the party, and getting everyone's bodies away from a TPK so that they can be resurrected.

His job in the party is to make the other material characters in the party feel better about themselves.

Magnor Criol
2008-11-08, 02:42 PM
But you are still talking about a lot of scrolls over the course of a campaign.
But that's what they're there for. That's the whole purpose of scrolls, and why they're so cheap - so you can make them for spells you use frequently. (Well, that or so someone else can use the spells, but that's another point.)


What book is that in?
Sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head, but I don't think it's called Penetrating Strike. It's not that hard to find, there's a number of variations on the "deal sneak attack to creatures you normally wouldn't be able to" type of feat.



Why would a melee-focused Ranger have that high of a DEX? Why put points into DEX (that the Ranger doesn't need) when they can put it into STR? Chain shirt and Studded Leather come out the same, assuming the wearer has the max DEX.
The Ranger needs DEX same as anyone else. It helps AC, reflex saves, and ranged accuracy, which even a melee-focused ranger won't ignore. Furthermore, many rangers go Dex-based over Str-based, on account of the fact that they don't get higher than light armor proficiency and many of their class features stop working when they don anything higher than light armor.



Which negates using Divine Power as an argument, if you assume the Cleric is only using it for "important fights."
It...really doesn't.



DMM requires turning, which requires CHA. The common argument is that Clerics don't need CHA, so relying on DMM doesn't work. Either a Cleric can use DMM (and needs CHA), or they don't need CHA and can't DMM as much as everyone says.
Clerics aren't powerful because of DMM. DMM only makes them more powerful. As it is, even core-only, they're still strong full casters that can wear fullplate, have decent HD, and some extra abilities (Turn/Rebuke and domains) on the side. Arguing for CHA importance based on DMM doesn't hold water.


Like move to the back and take out the caster? Oh wait, Monks are useless, I forgot.
Other classes can move to the back and take out a caster as well. Yes, monks move faster, but that doesn't seem to come into play as much as it seems like it should. Also, if the enemy caster has intelligence (not a guarantee, I know :smalltongue:), he probably won't let himself be completely outmaneuvered like that - you'll have to fight your way through some minions, no matter what angle you approach from.



Rogues can only kill fast if they get SA. Another place Monks are good - they can move into position for the Rogue to flank.
That SA is precisely why the rogue's low HD doesn't impair them too much in melee. They're still weak meleers, and shouldn't be on the front lines duking it out head-on with an enemy, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. They should sneak, tumble, and otherwise move so they're behind an enemy, getting that extra damage from sneak attack. Which monks don't get, by the way. At high levels, their fists might do more base damage, but the rogue's SA bonuses still outstrip that.



Wait, aren't Clerics casters, so shouldn't their spell slots be uses judiciously, as needed? So isn't the idea to allow them to keep their spell slots as much as possible?
Conservation is nice, but since the cleric's primary ability is the spellcasting, they're supposed to be used. So, sayign that your class ability saves the cleric one or two lower-level spell slots isn't really a point in the monk's favor.



But Rangers do have spells, meaning they can keep up. So what is your point?
A ranger's spells are like a paladin's - just a dab of extra icing on the cake. They don't get nearly enough spells per day, and the spells they get are mostly situational or useless, so the spells don't factor much into a ranger's power. They add a little bit, but not anything significant. If they're keeping up, they're doing it without help from spells, and if they're fallign behind, their spells won't stop that.


In the end, it comes down, I think, to the fact that the monks can't keep up either in the "specialize in one thing" department, or the "jack-of-all-trades" department. There's nothing they do that someone else doesn't do better, and you'll almost never be playing a DnD game as a solo player - you'll have teammates, and workign as a team means you can specialize and let others take up slack in the places you don't specialize in.

Kesnit, have you ever played a monk, or been in a game with someone playing one? You'll notice that they miss often, even when not using their Flurry of Blows; they're often in HP trouble; and there's not many things they do that someone else in the party probably couldn't have done as well or better. They even fail saves somewhat often, despite their all good saves, which is supposed to be their strong point.

Vortling
2008-11-08, 02:42 PM
Dungeonscape, I think.

Yes. Dungeonscape and it's called Penetrating strike. There's another version of it out there somewhere as a feat but the Dungeonscape version that replaces your trapsense for half SA damage against things that aren't normally affected by SA the better one.

Kesnit: What are you hoping to get out of this thread? Are there any specific classes that you'd like us to run comparisons against the monk? The conversation seems to be getting a bit heated and I'd like to take a step back and see how we can bring this back to be more constructive.

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-08, 02:43 PM
His job in the party is to make the other material characters in the party feel better about themselves.
Ah, but the Truenamer, Samurai, and Soulknife classes are better at that function than the monk.

Jack Zander
2008-11-08, 02:44 PM
His job in the party is to make the other material characters in the party feel better about themselves.

Because the incorporeal ones already feel pretty good.

Drascin
2008-11-08, 02:47 PM
His job in the party is to make the other material characters in the party feel better about themselves.

In one of my games, the rogue used the monk as the test battery for his "there are no traps" demonstrations. They had to take advantage of those saves somehow.

Spiryt
2008-11-08, 02:48 PM
A ranger's spells are like a paladin's - just a dab of extra icing on the cake. They don't get nearly enough spells per day, and the spells they get are mostly situational or useless, so the spells don't factor much into a ranger's power. They add a little bit, but not anything significant. If they're keeping up, they're doing it without help from spells, and if they're fallign behind, their spells won't stop that.


Although with Spell Compendium they're getting more meaningful.

And in comparison to the poor monk - ranger or paladin can at least buff their own stats with Bull Strenght or Cat's Grace without help of other characters. Nice, at least. Monk can't even buff his MAD with it.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 02:50 PM
Okay, again, why did you say Studded Leather? Why didn't you just say Chain shirt?

I just just throwing it out there as an example.


At higher levels you rarely run out if used smartly (not wasting them on Monk for example, I kid).

(chuckle)

Heal is a 6th level spell. At 20th level, you have 4 - and it must be prepared. A WIS of 22 is needed for 1 extra, or 30 for 2. You can convert multiple lower slots to healing, but it does take multiple slots - and assumes you are good (or neutral and convert to cures). Mass cure crit is 9th level, mass cure serious is 8th (4 slots of each, WIS of 26 or 28 for bonus slot). Cure moderate and light don't give enough HP to make them worthwhile at those levels. (Again, you are using a lot of slots if you use them.)

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-08, 02:53 PM
Heal is a 6th level spell. At 20th level, you have 4 - and it must be prepared. A WIS of 22 is needed for 1 extra, or 30 for 2. You can convert multiple lower slots to healing, but it does take multiple slots - and assumes you are good (or neutral and convert to cures). Mass cure crit is 9th level, mass cure serious is 8th (4 slots of each, WIS of 26 or 28 for bonus slot). Cure moderate and light don't give enough HP to make them worthwhile at those levels. (Again, you are using a lot of slots if you use them.)

No, Heal is emergency healing in combat. Out of combat you use wands of cure light/lesser vigor(the most cost effective healing there is). Also, at 9th level a smart cleric would use Mass Heal.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 02:54 PM
Heal is a 6th level spell. At 20th level, you have 4 - and it must be prepared. A WIS of 22 is needed for 1 extra, or 30 for 2. You can convert multiple lower slots to healing, but it does take multiple slots - and assumes you are good (or neutral and convert to cures). Mass cure crit is 9th level, mass cure serious is 8th (4 slots of each, WIS of 26 or 28 for bonus slot). Cure moderate and light don't give enough HP to make them worthwhile at those levels. (Again, you are using a lot of slots if you use them.)

In battle sure (for emergencies).

But as soon as battle is over you heal with CLW wands.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 02:54 PM
Kesnit, can you tell me exactly what a monk is meant to do? As in, what does it do that helps a party succeed? And, how does it do this better than another class? Because so far the only thing that I've seen a monk to better than anyone else(that is also useful) is carrying stuff for the party, and getting everyone's bodies away from a TPK so that they can be resurrected.

You gave two examples. :smallbiggrin:

Monks can do a some of a lot of things. I never claimed they are the perfect class. They have the mobility to get to the back and take out casters. They have the mobility to help Rogues flank. They can melee. They free up resources for other PC.


Kesnit, what are you looking for, exactly?

Someone to tell me why Monks suck.


You've been presented with numerous sound arguments as to why monks are considered underpowered in 3.5,

There is a big difference between "underpowered" and "suck." Many classes are called "underpowered," but only a few (Monk, Samari, Truenamer) are considered to be that bad.


and all you continue to do is deny that other classes are more powerful.

Nope. I only point out why those arguments do not mean Monks suck.


You've just finished cherrypicking someone's statement to have them "agree" that "clerics are useless."

That person said that Clerics shouldn't heal and shouldn't buff. I didn't cherry pick that at all, which you can see if you go back and read the post I was answering. All I did was take that person's argument to the logical conclusion. If Clerics shouldn't heal or buff, what are they supposed to do?

Yes, it was a sarcastic comment. Childish of me, probably.


Purity of Body and Diamond Body don't matter. Poisons as a whole are terribly done and a weakly implemented system.

That's the fault of DM's who use them badly, not Monks or poisons. I've seen DM's use poison and disease in ways that make them very inconvenient. Just because many DMs never put the party in a position where the abilities would be useful doesn't mean they can't be.


If they do make an impact, there is a class that specialized in fixing up people who have been poisoned. Yes, it is a situational spell that not every cleric will have with them.

Which is the point. Unless disease/poison is expected, chances are the Cleric and party won't have spells/potions to counteract them. And they can have long-term (well, day length) effects on the party if they are diseased/poisoned, esp if they are failing their saves and their abilities are lowered. If the second is the case, it takes 2 spells (per affected PC) to take care of it.


It also happens to not be necessary all that often. One or two backup scrolls can usually clean up all the poison/disease damage for a whole party.

You are assuming the party has the scrolls. If there is reason to think they will, then they will. But there is nothing stopping a DM from throwing bandits wielding poisoned weapons at the party unexpectedly.

We can argue that scrolls/potions/nightsticks/whatever are always available to solve any problem, but those may or may not be the case. At high levels, they probably are, but it comes down to use of limited resources. Spend money on scrolls you may never use, or save it to buy an item you know you will? Some players will buy the scrolls, some will not.


Flurry of Blows means far less without the full BAB.

So does SA, but no one says Rogues are extremely underpowered because they have 3/4 BAB.


Monks are decent at many things but excel at none.

I agree. But that doesn't mean they suck.


Monks have a dead ability: Slow fall. As has been said, a first-level arcane spell trumps this ability in virtually every circumstance.

Again, I agree.


A monk's "variety" abilities are often too limited. At 7th level, Wholeness of Body allows the recovery of 14 hit points. It caps at 40.

Neither are great, but either can keep you alive.


Cure moderate wounds recovers 9-25 hit points to any party member at the same level. Lay on hands is paladin level x Cha bonus, again to any party member, from a melee class with full BAB and a d10 Hit Die.

Agreed. Although the argument is often made that Paladin's don't have much else going for them.


Similarly, one use of dimension door per day is already rendered fairly moot by the monk's own run speed.

This is another situational one. There can be ways to use it by being creative.


Monks do need MAD. Strength for damage output and/or attack bonus. Dex for AC and/or attack bonus. Con for increased HP to offset being a middling-damage melee character with low AC and a d8 Hit Die. Wis for AC and abilities.

I didn't say they don't have MAD. I said it isn't as drastic as people say. DEX can be dropped and add points to WIS (to make the points more useful). CON is required for any melee class, but isn't as important as it might seem. (I'm playing a melee Rogue with 12 CON. Who needs HP when you have the AC not to get hit?)

lord_khaine
2008-11-08, 02:55 PM
To start with i think people should stop comparing the monk to the cleric, its pretty unfair to compare a full caster to someone who isnt.


Which is why melee classes as a whole lose to Wizards. Still, those classes can do something well other than suceed at saving throws.

but so can the monk, and making his save would give him more rounds to do so.


The rogue is a fragile damage dealer. He survives by killing things faster than they can kill him. The Monk is just fragile. He survives by running away
actualy, if you roll decent stats then a proberly build monk can do some decent damage.


Why was Nebo and Reel on, Love banned? Jeez, I didn't even notice that. Anyhoo, maybe we should have a STICKY on why Monks suck? Such as, by RAW, they may not have proficiency with their fists (Unarmed could be interpreted as a Simple Weapon) and hence take a -4 penalty?


becasue not everyone agree on that they suck?
also i might not know about Reel on Love, but i though Nebo was pretty rude in the last couple of posts he made.

and since Fax Celestis has made a very good summary of the commen oppinion on monks, then i will give my oppinion on those as well, though i would first mention, that when i played a monk we rolled out starts, so this only apply if you has decent ability scores.


The monk is a martially oriented class without full base attack. This means that he will hit less than other martially-oriented classes whether due to lower BAB or due to buffs.

This i personaly think Flurry of blows compensates for, as long as the opponent does not have a ac thats to much higher than than the attack bonus of the monk.


The monk does not do anything another class cannot already do better. Spells replicate a lot of the monk's abilities, and those that are not replicated by spells are instead replicated by such mundane things as armor. Slow Fall is replaced by feather fall, a ring of feather falling (which is hella cheap), or a badge of safe landing (even cheaper).

this apply to most noncaster, so i dont think its something that should be held specificly against monks.


The monk has conflicting abilities. Flurry of Blows and Fast Movement counteract each other. Increased unarmed strike damage and special monk weapons also conflict--either you can get an enchanted siangham, or you can use your fists, which cannot be enchanted without either house-ruling or entering a prestige class that forgoes the rest of your monk leveling (Kensai).

this is a matter of oppinion, as i see it it allows the monk to get into melee faster, so he can start flurrying sooner.
also regarding the enchantet fists, then there are allways enchantet gauntlets, though they do cost a feat to use.


The monk has abilities that don't make sense. Tongue of the Sun and Moon, easily replicable by tongues, comes far too late to be useful and doesn't make much sense anyway.
then again, Tongue of the Sun and the Moon comes so late that i suspect most players wont get it anyway, and even so its still usefull, since its allways on, unlike Tongue who require you actualy prepared that spell beforehand (since i cant imagine a sorcerer taking it).


The monk cannot multiclass or enter most prestige classes without either special DM dispensation or via feat expenditure. He also has a alignment restriction that prevents him from a variety of other abilities and powers
yes this is bloddy annoying, but at least most of the prestice classes that are worth taking for a monk has a clause allowing them to go back to monk.


The monk is textbook MAD: he requires Str for damage (and to-hit, without Weapon Finesse), Dex for AC (since he can't wear armor), Con (for HP), and Wis (for his class features' DCs and for his Wis-to-AC ability).
yes i have to agree on this point, playing a monk does require decent stat, though you can survive somewhat with a above average dex score.


In order to equal your typical frontline fighter's AC, a monk requires both a high Dex and a high Wis. Even in the instance that a monk does have the required Dex and/or Wis, the fighter will still retain most of his AC when flat-footed. Further, the monk cannot benefit from such armor enhancements as fortification.

but in return the monk has a better touch ac, and i think there are some rules somewhere for putting armor enchantments into bracers.


Any other character will be better able to make use of treasure and items found over the course of an adventure. Rogues and Bards have Use Magic Device to help them utilize items, while other classes have large swaths of proficiency (including armor proficiency). Spellcasters can utilize scrolls, wands, and staves.

im not sure i can agree with that, its my personal experience that most loot will be sold anyway, because people typicaly stick to a specific weapon and armor type, and whenever you use those wands and staves you are burning parts of your treasure.

also there are some lowlv potions that the monk gets a lot of use from, Potions of Mage armor and Enlarge.

edit

Kesnit, have you ever played a monk, or been in a game with someone playing one? You'll notice that they miss often, even when not using their Flurry of Blows; they're often in HP trouble; and there's not many things they do that someone else in the party probably couldn't have done as well or better. They even fail saves somewhat often, despite their all good saves, which is supposed to be their strong point.

i have actualy played a monk a couple off times, and the first ones i made did indeed suck awfully, before i learned both how to make one, and also how play one.

Draco Dracul
2008-11-08, 02:56 PM
Ah, but the Truenamer, Samurai, and Soulknife classes are better at that function than the monk.

So, monk isn't even the best at sucking? That somehow makes them suck even worse as can't even say "Well I may be awfull, but atleast I'm the best at being the worst."

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-08, 02:56 PM
You gave two examples. :smallbiggrin:

Monks can do a some of a lot of things. I never claimed they are the perfect class. They have the mobility to get to the back and take out casters. They have the mobility to help Rogues flank. They can melee. They free up resources for other PC.

The thing is, they do all of this worse than other classes. So why would you want a monk instead of any other class out there?

Edit: @ lord_khaine,
He brought up the cleric first, so its his fault.

InkEyes
2008-11-08, 03:00 PM
Yes. Dungeonscape and it's called Penetrating strike. There's another version of it out there somewhere as a feat but the Dungeonscape version that replaces your trapsense for half SA damage against things that aren't normally affected by SA the better one.

There's also Gravestrike weapons, really there are a lot options if you want to SA undead.

lord_khaine
2008-11-08, 03:02 PM
Edit: @ lord_khaine,
He brought up the cleric first, so its his fault.


yes, but you are forum regulars, so you are suposed to know better :smalltongue:

Mephit
2008-11-08, 03:10 PM
Monks can do a some of a lot of things. I never claimed they are the perfect class. They have the mobility to get to the back and take out casters. They have the mobility to help Rogues flank. They can melee. They free up resources for other PC.

And that's exactly what I'm saying. Having a monk in your party is better than having nothing at all. (Complaining about dividing the XP aside)
But if someone I'm playing with is making his character and asks me: "Hey, what do you think, should I play a Monk or a X" where X is any other Core class, I'll gladly take that Barbarian, Rogue, or Caster over the Monk.

Eldariel
2008-11-08, 03:13 PM
I'll just point out this: Monks also need Str if they're gonna do anything beyond attacking (Tripping, Grappling, etc.) and they need Wis to make use of Stunning Fist. And due to their spread of abilities, they can't solely focus on any of those abilities, making them quickly useless (the only reasons, casters can keep on using saving throw-spells is because they can afford to start with 18 in their casting stat (they only need that and Con) and can afford to put all their level-ups and stat boosts into it). Therefore, they're left only full attacking and since they can't move and full attack in the same round, they'll often be denied Flurry of Blows and all attacks beyond the first.

Also, Monks are often presented as Scouts. What people forget is that Monks don't have Trapfinding - if they go on scouting alone, they'll simply hit a trap and die. And if they go scouting with a Rogue, they'll simply increase the chance the Rogue gets noticed since they can't solely focus on Dexterity either. Also, if things get ugly, Rogues can use Wands to GTFO while Monks are stuck just using their move speed (which takes aeons to even beat Expeditious Retreat).


Cleric can get Turnings from Undeath-domain, Extra Turnings, Nightsticks, Reliquary Holy Symbol, etc. Cha 8 Cleric can still be persisting 2-3 spells even without Nightstick stackings. Mass Extra Turnings will get you much more.

Clerics only require Wis and Con. This also means they have the best saves in the game (next to Druids at any rate) and as they can focus on Wis solely, they'll have something like 6-7 Heals per day, giving them (and the party) effectively infinite HP, especially since you can Chain them and so on. And non-DMM Clerics can still fight with Divine Power for 4 encounters per day or so. Generally though, non-DMM Clerics are better off acting as spellcasters than melee. They still have control-spells, summons, etc. Of course, they can just go Divine Power > Quickened Divine Favor > fight+quickened Whatever.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 03:14 PM
Kesnit, I'd like to see your response to my previous post.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 03:21 PM
Rather than go those arguments point-by-point, I'm going to go through the Monk class feature by class feature. 3 Good Saves: this allows the Monk to survive. However, as I will show later, a Monk can't do much to hurt the enemy, so its' survival doesn't help the team. D&D is a team game, individual skill isn't useful.
d8 HD:Makes the Monk somewhat able to survive. Still not great, though, and will get ripped apart by a decent attack.
4 skills per level off of a good list:Not enough skills to take advantage of the list, but enough that you won't be screwed. 6 would have been much more useful, as is, the monk has fewer skills than the Wizard.
Partial BAB:Ouch. Meleer's with Partial BAB hurt. Cleric and Druid can buff themselves, but the Rogue and Monk miss a lot without decent weapon enhancements and similar to make the enemy easier to hit. What's that? The Monk can't enhance his fists? And his FoB decreases his chance to hit? Well, boop.
Bonus Feats:Finally, something decent. However, the feats are useless for a Monk. They're good for other classes to dip into Monk, but Improved Grapple needs Str, Large Size, and Full BAB, Stunning Fist needs a lot of Wisdom to overcome the, on average, highest save in the game, Combat Reflexes needs a Reach Weapon which Monks aren't capable of using, Deflect Arrows is useless due to the broad lack of Archers in the game, and Disarm/Trip suffer the same problems as Grappling. Great for dips, horrid for the class that gets them.
AC bonus:A monk has 4 things boosting AC(+1 every 5 levels, Dex, Wis, and Bracers of Armor). The +1 every 5 levels is similar to what a Cleric gets with Magic Vestments on the party. The Bracers of Armor are similar to the +1 enhancements that the party will have on their armor. That leaves Dex and Wis. A Fighter can wear Heavy Armor and get better AC than a Monk with 18s, through the investment of a 12 in Dex. Which is just embarrassing.. A Rogue can get the same AC with a Chain Shirt and 18 Dex. Less investment, more reward. The constant issue with the Monk class.
Flurry of Blows:At low levels, you won't have many things boosting to-hit. Reducing it is just bad. At higher levels, the bonus hit is being replicated by classes with higher BAB, and past level 11, the speed enhancement is almost standard. Just not enough of an advantage for the cost.
Unarmed Strike:The bread and butter of the Monk class. Too bad it apparently was dropped on the ground and stepped on. The Monk's fists deal less damage than the common weapons until level 11. Unfortunately, base weapon damage is incredibly important early on(when the Monk's sucks), and ceases to matter at about level 6. Magical enhancements on weapons(Flaming, Mighty Raging, etc) account for a good chunk of most build's damage(with Precision damage and PA accounting for the rest), and the Monk can't do any of that.
Evasion:Finally, something decent. Unfortunately, it again only boosts survivability, which isn't useful in a team-based game. Surviving a TPK isn't something to cheer about. Preventing one is.
Fast Movement:An Enhancement Bonus, so it doesn't stack with the other ways of getting this with minimal investment. Again, a weak and flavorful ability that doesn't actually let the class do anything.
Still Mind:See point #1, except this is more situational.
Ki Strike:Overcome some DR, at levels past the ones where characters who could actually use weapons could. Yeah. That's great.
Slow Fall:1st level spell, useable in an even more limited situation, and more ineffective. Like the move speed, it's flavorful, but useless.
Purity of Body:If you want immunity to disease, play a Cleric or a Healer and keep a scroll in your pocket. Or just wait a day after infection and then cure it. That's why they know the entire spell list.
Wholeness of Body:Cure less than a casting of Lesser Vigor(1st level) when you get it. Cure less than a casting of Vigor(3rd level) at level 20. Why not play a Cleric, again?
Improved Evasion:If you're facing an enemy who allows you to use Reflex Saves at this level, thank your DM profusely. There are so many better ways to kill you, Reflex Saves are pointless. Also, see point #1.
Diamond Body:At this point, most people only fail poison saves on a 1 anyways, so how is this helpful?
Abundant Step:4th level spell, once per day. You can get the same effect with a 10k item or just by playing a caster.
Diamond Soul:Block beneficial spells. Yeah. Why do I want to play this class again?
Quivering Palm:1/week, target a Fort save, requires Wis. Not even worth mentioning.
Timeless Body:1st level Kobolds get this. Besides, aging in-game is incredibly rare, and the chance it happens after you reach this level is infinitesimal. Fun, flavorful, useless.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon:2nd level spell. If you don't have access to it at level 17, you really shouldn't be playing.
Empty body:Finally, something decent. Too bad Warlocks got it at level 9, or that casters got it 2 levels earlier. Not worth 19 levels for.
Perfect Self:There was a thread about whether this level is better or worse, in the long run, than taking Rogue 20. The Outsider type is a nerf as much as a benefit. In short, don't even count this.

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 03:25 PM
You gave two examples. :smallbiggrin:

Monks can do a some of a lot of things. I never claimed they are the perfect class. They have the mobility to get to the back and take out casters. They have the mobility to help Rogues flank. They can melee. They free up resources for other PC.

The only way of a monk taking out a caster is by imploding his brain with his weakness. No really. The argument that monks are good against casters (especially arcane) is null with all that no-save/no-SR spells.

They can melee. Oh really? Play a fighter, fight with gaunlets, I'm pretty sure he will beat the monk in melee. And can flank, too.

Mobility, yes, monks are the kings of mobility (if someone casts overland flight on them). If you want to be the guy running and jumping around while the others do the quest, help yourself.

Sorry for my style of commenting this, your question has been answered by others.

streakster
2008-11-08, 03:27 PM
By the way, if anyone reading this thread feels the desire to play a martial artist type and would like to be actually useful as well, try playing an unarmed swordsage or K and Frank's Monk rewrite (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=659653).

Magnor Criol
2008-11-08, 03:32 PM
i have actualy played a monk a couple off times, and the first ones i made did indeed suck awfully, before i learned both how to make one, and also how play one.

In a game we're in, one of my long-time-DnDer friends, a...moderately skilled optimizer, is playing a monk with Vow of Cheesery Poverty, and he's still only marginally better than the rest of us. And honestly, much of that superiority comes from A) his DnD experience, allowing him lots of metagame thinking; B) the DM is his wife; and C) the heaps of bonus Exalted feats he gits with VoP. None of these are things from the monk class. the fast movement is the only thing that's come in hand that's monk-only.

In fact, he usually opens up each encounter with a charge attack at an enemy, which he flavors as a flying knee-drop kick. However, he almost always misses this and embeds his knee in the ground instead. It's become a running gag in our campaign.


By the way, if anyone reading this thread feels the desire to play a martial artist type and would like to be actually useful as well, try playing an unarmed swordsage or K and Frank's Monk rewrite (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=659653).

Pretty sure the OP asked specifically for "nothing about unarmed swordsage." :smalltongue: Really, though, this doesn't figure into it; the argument is about whether or not monks are bad, not whether the swordsage is better.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-08, 03:34 PM
Note on Vow of Poverty - above low levels (let's say 1-6), if it's overpowered in your campaigns, it means your DM gives you much less treasure than the WBL table suggests.

streakster
2008-11-08, 03:39 PM
Pretty sure the OP asked specifically for "nothing about unarmed swordsage." :smalltongue: Really, though, this doesn't figure into it; the argument is about whether or not monks are bad, not whether the swordsage is better.

Pretty sure I wasn't addressing him!:smallbiggrin:

Honestly, that was a note to anyone who wanted to play a martial artist. That's a common question in monk threads, and I thought I'd take care of it ahead of time.

By the way, we don't have graphs yet, do we? I should get that done too...

Optimystik
2008-11-08, 03:44 PM
By the way, if anyone reading this thread feels the desire to play a martial artist type and would like to be actually useful as well, try playing an unarmed swordsage or K and Frank's Monk rewrite (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=659653).

That rewrite made me cream my breeches. Who would have thought monks had that much unused awesome?

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 04:19 PM
But that's what they're there for. That's the whole purpose of scrolls, and why they're so cheap - so you can make them for spells you use frequently. (Well, that or so someone else can use the spells, but that's another point.)

1 scroll is cheap, but they add up. A scroll of Divine Power is 350gp. Assume your 7th level Cleric uses 3/day (1 for every encounter where they can't cast the spell). That's 1050/day - or the cost of a +1 weapon every 2 days. Even assuming they only use 1/day, that's 2450/week. A 7th LVL character (assuming they bought nothing else), would go through WBL in 8 weeks.


Sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head, but I don't think it's called Penetrating Strike. It's not that hard to find, there's a number of variations on the "deal sneak attack to creatures you normally wouldn't be able to" type of feat.

I'll keep looking. (I did a quick look before posting.) I play a Rogue in a PnP campaign, and my DM keep throwing non-SA-able monsters at us. :(


The Ranger needs DEX same as anyone else. It helps AC, reflex saves, and ranged accuracy, which even a melee-focused ranger won't ignore.

A melee-ranger won't have the feats to burn on ranged. It's beneficial, but they are much better off putting those points into STR and CON.


It...really doesn't.

Yes, it does. Saying "Divine Power makes the cleric all that more powerful" is true - when DP is used. When it isn't (which is probably most of the time), they they have the same BAB as a Monk.


Clerics aren't powerful because of DMM. DMM only makes them more powerful.

Granted.


As it is, even core-only, they're still strong full casters that can wear fullplate, have decent HD, and some extra abilities (Turn/Rebuke and domains) on the side. Arguing for CHA importance based on DMM doesn't hold water.

I'm not the one who brought up DMM. I just pointed out why a Cleric using DMM would need CHA. (I confess, I forgot about nightsticks.)


Other classes can move to the back and take out a caster as well.

Slower and probably taking Attacks of Opportunity. (A Rogue could probably pass the AoO's, but then they are doing less damage since they probably wouldn't be getting SA. At most, 1 round unless they had HiPS.)


he probably won't let himself be completely outmaneuvered like that - you'll have to fight your way through some minions, no matter what angle you approach from.

Tumble. Diminsion Door.


They should sneak, tumble, and otherwise move so they're behind an enemy, getting that extra damage from sneak attack. Which monks don't get, by the way.

No, but they have the mobility to get into position to allow the Rogue to get SA.


At high levels, their fists might do more base damage, but the rogue's SA bonuses still outstrip that.

But Monk fists do the same damage, no matter what. Rogue SA does not.


A ranger's spells are like a paladin's - just a dab of extra icing on the cake. They don't get nearly enough spells per day, and the spells they get are mostly situational or useless, so the spells don't factor much into a ranger's power.

I was answering someone who said Rangers aren't as good at melee as Fighters and they only keep up because of spells. :)


In the end, it comes down, I think, to the fact that the monks can't keep up either in the "specialize in one thing" department, or the "jack-of-all-trades" department.

(nod) But I've heard the same thing about Bard, but almost no one says they suck.


Kesnit, have you ever played a monk, or been in a game with someone playing one?

Yes, the main tank in my PnP group is a Monk.


You'll notice that they miss often, even when not using their Flurry of Blows;

He hits more than he misses.


they're often in HP trouble;

Seldom


and there's not many things they do that someone else in the party probably couldn't have done as well or better.

Given that the Monk and the Rogue are the tanks, I disagree. (We also have a Wizard and a archery-focused Ranger.)


They even fail saves somewhat often, despite their all good saves, which is supposed to be their strong point.

I've seen Fighters fail Fort saves, and my Rogue has failed Reflex saves. Saying a class is bad because it fails saves they should make doesn't make sense.


No, Heal is emergency healing in combat. Out of combat you use wands of cure light/lesser vigor(the most cost effective healing there is).

And three days later when everyone is back up to full health... :)


And that's exactly what I'm saying. Having a monk in your party is better than having nothing at all. (Complaining about dividing the XP aside)
But if someone I'm playing with is making his character and asks me: "Hey, what do you think, should I play a Monk or a X" where X is any other Core class, I'll gladly take that Barbarian, Rogue, or Caster over the Monk.

OK, that make sense.


The only way of a monk taking out a caster is by imploding his brain with his weakness. No really. The argument that monks are good against casters (especially arcane) is null with all that no-save/no-SR spells.

I may not have been clear. The Monk can get back there and melee the caster and kill them. SR aside (which I wasn't thinking of), a Monk has all good saves. Is there a chance the Monk will fail? Of course, but there is also a chance a Fighter will fail a Fort save.


They can melee. Oh really? Play a fighter, fight with gaunlets, I'm pretty sure he will beat the monk in melee. And can flank, too.

A spiked gauntlet does 1d4 damage and never increases. A Monk starts at 1d6 and moves up.



Here's what I see is wrong with the monk (and remember, this is my opinion):

Sorry for not getting back to you. I've been trying to work my way through responses while watching football...


The monk is a martially oriented class without full base attack. This means that he will hit less than other martially-oriented classes whether due to lower BAB or due to buffs.

I know I said not to mention Swordsage, but it also has 3/4 BAB.


The monk does not do anything another class cannot already do better.

The same can be said about Bards, but no one says the suck.


The monk has conflicting abilities. Flurry of Blows and Fast Movement counteract each other.

Which only means they aren't used simultaniously. It doesn't mean neither is useful.


Increased unarmed strike damage and special monk weapons also conflict--either you can get an enchanted siangham, or you can use your fists, which cannot be enchanted without either house-ruling or entering a prestige class that forgoes the rest of your monk leveling (Kensai).

Or you enchant gloves. Gloves are just clothing, so there are no proficiencies to worry about.


The monk has abilities that don't make sense. Tongue of the Sun and Moon, easily replicable by tongues, comes far too late to be useful and doesn't make much sense anyway.

Depends on the focus of your campaign. Some are more focused on combat, some on RP. Tongue of the Moon and Sun is useful for RP. Though I grant that it can be replicated.


The monk cannot multiclass or enter most prestige classes without either special DM dispensation or via feat expenditure. He also has a alignment restriction that prevents him from a variety of other abilities and powers.

Paladins can't multi-class. Lots of classes have alignment resrtrictions.


The monk is textbook MAD: he requires Str for damage (and to-hit, without Weapon Finesse), Dex for AC (since he can't wear armor), Con (for HP), and Wis (for his class features' DCs and for his Wis-to-AC ability).

Except DEX can be kept at 10-12 and points put into WIS so they get double benefit. CON can be kept low (12-14) as well, so long as you boost your AC.


Even in the instance that a monk does have the required Dex and/or Wis, the fighter will still retain most of his AC when flat-footed. Further, the monk cannot benefit from such armor enhancements as fortification.

I asked before, but if anyone answered I missed it. Where is that RAW?


Any other character will be better able to make use of treasure and items found over the course of an adventure. Rogues and Bards have Use Magic Device to help them utilize items, while other classes have large swaths of proficiency (including armor proficiency). Spellcasters can utilize scrolls, wands, and staves.
[/list]

Clerics can't use wands and scrolls of arcane spells. Wizards and Sorc can't use divine magical scrolls/wands.

Kyeudo
2008-11-08, 04:25 PM
That person said that Clerics shouldn't heal and shouldn't buff. I didn't cherry pick that at all, which you can see if you go back and read the post I was answering. All I did was take that person's argument to the logical conclusion. If Clerics shouldn't heal or buff, what are they supposed to do?


You don't understand Clerics very well. You should not be burning combat time buffing the party or healing. Any of that should be carried out before you start a fight. During a fight a Cleric should be breaking faces and crippling enemies. Anything else is a wasted round.

For emergencies, Heal is the only healing spell worth casting inside combat, and even that is really a turn wasted.



You are assuming the party has the scrolls. If there is reason to think they will, then they will. But there is nothing stopping a DM from throwing bandits wielding poisoned weapons at the party unexpectedly.

We can argue that scrolls/potions/nightsticks/whatever are always available to solve any problem, but those may or may not be the case. At high levels, they probably are, but it comes down to use of limited resources. Spend money on scrolls you may never use, or save it to buy an item you know you will? Some players will buy the scrolls, some will not.


Running into poison and disease is guaranteed. You keep a couple of scrolls around for when you have to use them and then replace them as they are used. Most of the time, though, you can just ignore poison and disease because they don't cause much damage.



So does SA, but no one says Rogues are extremely underpowered because they have 3/4 BAB.


They make up for hitting less with flanking and dealing more damage per blow. Their average damage per round is MUCH higher than a Monk. Rogues also are very good outside of combat for getting past traps and obstacles, where the Monk can't do anything for the party as a whole.



I didn't say they don't have MAD. I said it isn't as drastic as people say. DEX can be dropped and add points to WIS (to make the points more useful). CON is required for any melee class, but isn't as important as it might seem. (I'm playing a melee Rogue with 12 CON. Who needs HP when you have the AC not to get hit?)

Ditch Dex at your own risk. It costs you AC, which you don't get much of as a monk. Attack bonuses increase faster than AC, so you will get hit, making Con a vital stat for anyone who is going to be on the front lines.

Let's take a look at the attribute dependancies for all classes I can think of:

Fighter: Strength and Con
Barbarian: Strength and Con
Bard: Charisma and Dex
Cleric: Wisdom
Ranger: Strength, Dexterity, and Con (ony 14 Wisdom needed)
Paladin: Strength, Con, and Charisma (only 14 Wisdom needed).
Monk: Wisdom, Strength, Dex, and Con.
Wizard: Int
Sorcerer: Charisma
Rogue: Dexterity and Int

Warlock: Dex and Cha
Wu Jen: Int
Warmage: Cha and Int

Favored Soul: Charisma and Wisdom
Shujenja: Charisma and Wisdom (IIRC)
Spirit Shaman: Charisma and Wisdom (IIRC)

Hexblade: Charisma, Strength, Dex, and Con
Samurai: Strength and Con
Swashbuckler: Strength, Dex, and Con

Artificer: Int and Charisma

Psion: Int
Psychic Warrior: Strength, Con, and Wis
Wilder: Charisma
Soulknife: Strength, Dex, and Con

Ardent: Wis
Lurk: Dex and Int
Divine Mind: Wisdom, Strength, Dex, Con

Incarnate: Wisdom, Dex, and Con
Soulborn: Strength and Con
Totemist: Strength and Con

Only 3 that require 4 attributes to be good, all 3 of which are considered sucky.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 04:32 PM
I know I said not to mention Swordsage, but it also has 3/4 BAB.The swordsage also defeats the "cannot do something another class cannot already do" with it's maneuvers and 3 (!) unique disciplines.

The same can be said about Bards, but no one says the suck.False. Bards get bard spells, which are, with proper application, some of the most broken spells in the game. Bards also get UMD, the most powerful skill in the game, and have a Cha-centric class which synergizes with it.

Which only means they aren't used simultaniously. It doesn't mean neither is useful.I didn't say they weren't useful, I said they were conflicting.

Or you enchant gloves. Gloves are just clothing, so there are no proficiencies to worry about.This is a house rule. Gloves are not weapons and therefore cannot be enchanted with weapon enhancements. Gauntlets are weapons, sure, but monks are not proficient with those--and even if they take a feat to gain proficiency, they still can't use monk powers through them.

Depends on the focus of your campaign. Some are more focused on combat, some on RP. Tongue of the Moon and Sun is useful for RP. Though I grant that it can be replicated.Replicated by a third-level spell no less. And that's the fundament of the problem: nearly anything a monk can do can be replicated with third level or lower spells, with greater frequency and more success.

Paladins can't multi-class. Lots of classes have alignment resrtrictions....that doesn't make it okay. It's a big hindrance on a character as dependent upon prestige classes as 3.5e.

Except DEX can be kept at 10-12 and points put into WIS so they get double benefit. CON can be kept low (12-14) as well, so long as you boost your AC.Um, no. Dex is required in order to match AC with any other martially-oriented character. And you still lose the benefit to AC when stunned or paralyzed, whereas armor would still protect you, and more effectively.

I asked before, but if anyone answered I missed it. Where is that RAW?Armor enhancements can only be applied to armor. Robes are not armor. Therefore, armor enhancements cannot be applied to robes.

Clerics can't use wands and scrolls of arcane spells. Wizards and Sorc can't use divine magical scrolls/wands.No, but they still have their own spell lists to work with--and in the case of the sorceror, a high Cha helps with UMD. In the case of the cleric, the Magic domain lets the cleric activate arcane items as an arcane caster of half their cleric level.

afroakuma
2008-11-08, 04:35 PM
1 scroll is cheap, but they add up. A scroll of Divine Power is 350gp. Assume your 7th level Cleric uses 3/day (1 for every encounter where they can't cast the spell). That's 1050/day - or the cost of a +1 weapon every 2 days. Even assuming they only use 1/day, that's 2450/week. A 7th LVL character (assuming they bought nothing else), would go through WBL in 8 weeks.

8 weeks, that's 7 days each? So 56 days. Average of, what, four encounters a day? Let's say each of those encounters is a single CR 7 monster, and we have a party of four. That's 224 encounters, each resulting in 2100 XP (525 individually). For a total of 117600 XP. Which is... if I'm not mistaken... a whackload of XP for a 7th level character. Enough to get him or her to... 15th, 16th level? All for a measly 19600 GP.

Your argument is specious.

AslanCross
2008-11-08, 04:38 PM
I think one of the best arguments for the Monk being suboptimal is that its primary class features do not synergize with each other. Fast movement means you move around a lot. Flurry of Blows means you stay put a lot. Either way you're only going to be able to use one at a time when you'd like to be able to do BOTH if you want to be a skirmisher.

The Monk is best at surviving. That's it. Monsters don't die and evil villains' plots don't unravel because a guy who has virtually no way of killing survives their attacks every single time. The thing is, the Cleric can help others survive better. A rogue with the right build or a scout can skirmish much more effectively, AND can be a much more effective skill monkey than a Monk. A monk cannot tank for others as well as a fighter could due to his low AC. A monk's funky abilities can all be replicated by a spellcaster's spells.

Really, the Monk's main weakness is that they threw together a bunch of abilities that sounded cool, but in the end they didn't really contribute much to the soundness of the class. As such it does not fill any specific role in the party and cannot be optimized much to excel in any. Unless you consider "oddball" to be a valid party role.

Bayar
2008-11-08, 04:43 PM
And the monk survives because he doesnt generate enough threat for the mobs to go aggro on his ass.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 04:45 PM
I'll keep looking. (I did a quick look before posting.) I play a Rogue in a PnP campaign, and my DM keep throwing non-SA-able monsters at us. :(That's your fault. There are 4 ways, minimum, to SA undead. 2 of those also apply to all others that are immune.
A melee-ranger won't have the feats to burn on ranged. It's beneficial, but they are much better off putting those points into STR and CON.Melee Ranger is one of the weaker builds. Assuming someone did make one of those, they'd want high Str, Con, and Dex. Depending on rolls, a 16 may be reasonable for Dex.
Yes, it does. Saying "Divine Power makes the cleric all that more powerful" is true - when DP is used. When it isn't (which is probably most of the time), they they have the same BAB as a Monk. But they don't have to Melee. If they're going to melee, DP. If they aren't, don't. Drop AoE SoD spells, Battlefield Control, or party Buffs that don't need AB to make the enemy suck.
Slower and probably taking Attacks of Opportunity. (A Rogue could probably pass the AoO's, but then they are doing less damage since they probably wouldn't be getting SA. At most, 1 round unless they had HiPS.)If a Rogue doesn't have the ability to SA every round on a full-attack, he again deserves to lose. And when was the last time an extra 10-20' of speed mattered? By the time the Monk has decent speed boosts, Haste is a perfect 1st round buff.
Tumble. Diminsion Door. Both of which a Rogue can use easier by the time you get them.
No, but they have the mobility to get into position to allow the Rogue to get SA. As does another Rogue, or a Summon Monster spell, or the Ranger's ACF from PHBII.
But Monk fists do the same damage, no matter what. Rogue SA does not.it does if you're a decent Rogue. Beyond that, 4d8 is, on average, 11 points better than the base damage of a Greatsword, at level 20, after 2 size increases. compared to a plain Greatsword. 11 point's isn't worth mentioning at those levels.
I was answering someone who said Rangers aren't as good at melee as Fighters and they only keep up because of spells. :) Rangers aren't. Archery is the only path worth it, and they can only do that exactly as well as a Fighter. The other things(spells, AC) are what give them a slight edge.
(nod) But I've heard the same thing about Bard, but almost no one says they suck. Not anymore. Bards suck if you don't build them well. An IC-focused bard can be adding 10d6 damage to your allies' weapons. A Snowflake Wardancer can rip enemies apart in melee. A Sublime Chord is a full-caster along the lines of a sorcerer, with more abilities. But a Bard that tries to be a Jack-of-all-Trades? Sucks.
Yes, the main tank in my PnP group is a Monk. How, exactly, does he make enemies hit him? The Monk has no damage output and limited AoO ability. Any enemy with Int 5 would walk away, take the AoO, and crush the rest of the party.
I may not have been clear. The Monk can get back there and melee the caster and kill them. SR aside (which I wasn't thinking of), a Monk has all good saves. Is there a chance the Monk will fail? Of course, but there is also a chance a Fighter will fail a Fort save. Or the caster could be smart, and drop spells which don't allow saves. Solid Fog, for example. How much do you move, again?
A spiked gauntlet does 1d4 damage and never increases. A Monk starts at 1d6 and moves up.And at level 20, the Monk is dealing 2d10+Str+5(GMW)(16+str), while the Fighter is dealing 1d4+Str+5(GMW)+1d6(Flaming)+1d6(Shocking)+2d6(Holy )(21+Str with minimal investment because I can't be bothered). How is the Monk ahead?
I know I said not to mention Swordsage, but it also has 3/4 BAB. And the ability to make attack rolls using a Conc check instead of BAB.
Which only means they aren't used simultaniously. It doesn't mean neither is useful.It means neither is useful at the same time.
Or you enchant gloves. Gloves are just clothing, so there are no proficiencies to worry about.Not possible by RAW. Should be, but isn't.
Depends on the focus of your campaign. Some are more focused on combat, some on RP. Tongue of the Moon and Sun is useful for RP. Though I grant that it can be replicated.At level 17, you should be able to speak any language. No question. A 1st level spell by level 17 isn't even noteworthy.
Paladins can't multi-class. Lots of classes have alignment resrtrictions. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be noted when showing all of the ways that the Monk sucks.
Except DEX can be kept at 10-12 and points put into WIS so they get double benefit. CON can be kept low (12-14) as well, so long as you boost your AC.But they can't boost their AC. Any boost they do to their AC someone else can do better. They end up dying fast if they have low Con, and getting hit easily if they haven't maxed both Wis and Dex.
I asked before, but if anyone answered I missed it. Where is that RAW?How do you plan to get armor enhancements if you can't wear armor?
Clerics can't use wands and scrolls of arcane spells. Wizards and Sorc can't use divine magical scrolls/wands.But they still can use more wands than a Monk can.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 04:50 PM
Rangers aren't. Archery is the only path worth it, and they can only do that exactly as well as a Fighter. The other things(spells, AC) are what give them a slight edge.


Not true, Rangers have their own version of Wraithstrike (Find the gap last 1 rd/level better, etc). Problerm is so fewe spell slots: might want to buy a scroll.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 04:51 PM
Not true, Rangers have their own version of Wraithstrike (Find the gap last 1 rd/level better, etc). Problerm is so fewe spell slots: might want to buy a scroll.Which is what I meant. Spells and the like make them better than the Fighter, as does Swift Hunter.

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 05:01 PM
I may not have been clear. The Monk can get back there and melee the caster and kill them. SR aside (which I wasn't thinking of), a Monk has all good saves. Is there a chance the Monk will fail? Of course, but there is also a chance a Fighter will fail a Fort save.

Did you even read my comment? What is the chance to get to a flying wizard? How are you going to pierce a Wall of Force with a small hole for the caster to fire spells at you? Solid Fog? Black Tentacles? Bridge disintegrating under your feet? The caster might have DR, Mirror Images and so on. You have to team up to beat this kind of caster, and the monk isn't a team player.



A spiked gauntlet does 1d4 damage and never increases. A Monk starts at 1d6 and moves up.

The damage dice become very insignificant from level 6 on. The monk may have 1d10 fist damage, that averages 5.5 + Str. The fighter will have a higher STR because he isn't that MAD, Weapon Specialisation, and a BAB that allows him to use Power Attack. Enhancements don't count since they both get them. Do the math. Isn't it impressive that a fighter specialising to such a bad weapon is still better?

Flickerdart
2008-11-08, 05:01 PM
Which is what I meant. Spells and the like make them better than the Fighter, as does Swift Hunter.
I wonder if a Ranger's Animal Companion can take down a Monk all alone. Someone do some Arena math, counting the fact that the companion is 4 levels below.

Innis Cabal
2008-11-08, 05:02 PM
All I see here is

"Monk sucks if the other class(X) stops doing what they are supposed to be doing and do what the monk does."

Grats, your playing a monk now.

only1doug
2008-11-08, 05:02 PM
8 weeks, that's 7 days each? So 56 days. Average of, what, four encounters a day? Let's say each of those encounters is a single CR 7 monster, and we have a party of four. That's 224 encounters, each resulting in 2100 XP (525 individually). For a total of 117600 XP. Which is... if I'm not mistaken... a whackload of XP for a 7th level character. Enough to get him or her to... 15th, 16th level? All for a measly 19600 GP.

Your argument is specious.

and in addition to this, if the GM is trying to keep everyone at or near their WBL guideline then used consumables (such as scroll) are irrelevant.

7th level character needs 7000xp to level (starts at 21000xp and goes 28000xp)
which is 14 encounters (as shown by Afroakuma).
Of those 14 encounters the first 1 of every 4 is covered by the clerics memorised spell slot so we only use 10 scrolls between starting L7 and gaining L8. total cost 3500gp, long term cost 0 they were consumables, they got consumed, WBL will make up the difference.

Project_Mayhem
2008-11-08, 05:03 PM
Which is what I meant. Spells and the like make them better than the Fighter, as does Swift Hunter.

Is swift hunter the feat that makes ranger/scouts awesome?

streakster
2008-11-08, 05:03 PM
All I see here is

"Monk sucks if the other class(X) stops doing what they are supposed to be doing and do what the monk does."

Grats, your playing a monk now.

Question: What, in fact, does the monk do?

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:05 PM
All I see here is

"Monk sucks if the other class(X) stops doing what they are supposed to be doing and do what the monk does."

Grats, your playing a monk now.

Then I'm sorry to say you don't have very good reading comprehension.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:05 PM
You don't understand Clerics very well. You should not be burning combat time buffing the party or healing. Any of that should be carried out before you start a fight. During a fight a Cleric should be breaking faces and crippling enemies. Anything else is a wasted round.

Any DM worth the title is going to space out encounters to the Cleric can't just cast buffs in the morning and then let them go all day.


Running into poison and disease is guaranteed. You keep a couple of scrolls around for when you have to use them and then replace them as they are used. Most of the time, though, you can just ignore poison and disease because they don't cause much damage.

Tell that to the character who can't move because they are encombered from STR loss. Or the character who has almost no HP because they lost CON.


They make up for hitting less with flanking and dealing more damage per blow.

They still have to hit, and they are as likely to hit as the Monk.


Ditch Dex at your own risk. It costs you AC, which you don't get much of as a monk.

I said less DEX and more WIS. Same AC, and other bonuses as well.


Attack bonuses increase faster than AC, so you will get hit, making Con a vital stat for anyone who is going to be on the front lines.

Which means Clerics need it too.

Fighter: Strength and Con
Barbarian: Strength and Con
Bard: Charisma and Dex
Cleric: Wisdom and CON
Ranger: Strength, Dexterity, and Con (ony 14 Wisdom needed)
Paladin: Strength, Con, and Charisma (only 14 Wisdom needed).
Monk: Wisdom, Strength, Dex, and Con.

Again, DEX can be left 12-14, leaving Monks in the same state as Rangers and Paladins.


Wizard: Int
Sorcerer: Charisma
Rogue: Dexterity and Int

Warlock: Dex and Cha
Wu Jen: Int
Warmage: Cha and Int

Favored Soul: Charisma and Wisdom
Shujenja: Charisma and Wisdom (IIRC)
Spirit Shaman: Charisma and Wisdom (IIRC)

Hexblade: Charisma, Strength, Dex, and Con
Samurai: Strength and Con
Swashbuckler: Strength, Dex, and Con

Artificer: Int and Charisma

Psion: Int
Psychic Warrior: Strength, Con, and Wis
Wilder: Charisma
Soulknife: Strength, Dex, and Con

Ardent: Wis
Lurk: Dex and Int
Divine Mind: Wisdom, Strength, Dex, Con

Incarnate: Wisdom, Dex, and Con
Soulborn: Strength and Con
Totemist: Strength and Con


Only 3 that require 4 attributes to be good, all 3 of which are considered sucky.

Except Monks and Hexblades don't need the high DEX you think they do. (I also play a Hexblade in another PnP campaign.) You can also make an argument that any caster needs CON for concentration (either defensive casting or not to lose spells when taking damage).



False. Bards get bard spells, which are, with proper application, some of the most broken spells in the game.

Which a Rogue can cast with UMD.


Bards also get UMD, the most powerful skill in the game,

So do Rogues.


I didn't say they weren't useful, I said they were conflicting.

Point taken.


This is a house rule.

So is allowing DMM cheese through nightsticks. (The DM has the final say in either.) Also, robes (which are NOT armor) can be enchanted as armor, so why can't gloves be enchanted as weapons?


Replicated by a third-level spell no less. And that's the fundament of the problem: nearly anything a monk can do can be replicated with third level or lower spells, with greater frequency and more success.

Uh, how is a spell "greater frequency and with more success" than an "always active and never fails" ability. Not saying the spell can't replicate it, just saying the spell has to be cast, meaning it has to be known and prepared, and it takes time to cast.


...that doesn't make it okay. It's a big hindrance on a character as dependent upon prestige classes as 3.5e.

Huh? Who says any character has to take a PrC? Besides, that wasn't your argument. You just said that Monks can't multiclass and have alignment restrictions.


Um, no. Dex is required in order to match AC with any other martially-oriented character.

But it doesn't have to be as high as it seems everyone is trying to make it. 12-14 works, and boost WIS.


And you still lose the benefit to AC when stunned or paralyzed, whereas armor would still protect you, and more effectively.

With the exception of a Fighter in full plate, any class would lose much of their AC if flat-footed.


Armor enhancements can only be applied to armor. Robes are not armor. Therefore, armor enhancements cannot be applied to robes.

Except there are robes with armor enhancements. Robe of the Archmagi (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#robeoftheArchmagi)


No, but they still have their own spell lists to work with--and in the case of the sorceror, a high Cha helps with UMD. In the case of the cleric, the Magic domain lets the cleric activate arcane items as an arcane caster of half their cleric level.

That wasn't the point. Saying "casters can better use magic items because they are casters" ignores the fact that the caster may not be able to use a thing you find. UMD is Trained-only, and not a class skill for Sorc.

streakster
2008-11-08, 05:08 PM
Except there are robes with armor enhancements. Robe of the Archmagi (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#robeoftheArchmagi)


And that is in the wondrous item section, not the armor section.

What do we think this means?

Chas the mage
2008-11-08, 05:10 PM
Monks are fine...

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:11 PM
And that is in the wondrous item section, not the armor section.

What do we think this means?

Fax said robes can't have armor enchantments. I only showed him that he is wrong.

Project_Mayhem
2008-11-08, 05:13 PM
Monks are fine...

Persuasive arguement, I like it.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:16 PM
Which a Rogue can cast with UMD.

So do Rogues.Last I checked, we were discussing the monk.


So is allowing DMM cheese through nightsticks. (The DM has the final say in either.) Also, robes (which are NOT armor) can be enchanted as armor, so why can't gloves be enchanted as weapons?False. your indicative item, the Robe of the Archmagi, is a Wondrous Item, not armor, and is therefore under a different set of rules. DMM/Nightstick cheese is NOT a house rule--preventing it is.


Uh, how is a spell "greater frequency and with more success" than an "always active and never fails" ability. Not saying the spell can't replicate it, just saying the spell has to be cast, meaning it has to be known and prepared, and it takes time to cast.How often can a monk use Quivering Palm? Compare that to how often an equally-leveled spellcaster can use phantasmal killer, power word: kill, and similar spells.


Huh? Who says any character has to take a PrC? Besides, that wasn't your argument. You just said that Monks can't multiclass and have alignment restrictions. The 3.5 game's options are focused mostly into prestige classes. Taking away that potential severely hampers ability growth.


But it doesn't have to be as high as it seems everyone is trying to make it. 12-14 works, and boost WIS. With the exception of a Fighter in full plate, any class would lose much of their AC if flat-footed.14 Dex + 18 wis comes out to +6 AC, +4 of which appies when flat-footed. Full plate, unenchanted, with an unenchanted shield and a 12 Dex, makes +11 AC, +10 of which still applies when flat-footed.


Except there are robes with armor enhancements. Robe of the Archmagi (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#robeoftheArchmagi)
Again, wondrous item, not armor.


That wasn't the point. Saying "casters can better use magic items because they are casters" ignores the fact that the caster may not be able to use a thing you find. UMD is Trained-only, and not a class skill for Sorc.Mo, but they are far more likely to.

streakster
2008-11-08, 05:16 PM
Fax said robes can't have armor enchantments. I only showed him that he is wrong.

Ah. So this has nothing to do with the "Monks can have armor enchantments on their robes" argument, and the monks still don't get fortification. OK.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:17 PM
Fax said robes can't have armor enchantments. I only showed him that he is wrong.

It doesn't have armor enhancements. It has abilities that are similar to armor enhancements.

Roderick_BR
2008-11-08, 05:29 PM
Why would a melee-focused Ranger have that high of a DEX? Why put points into DEX (that the Ranger doesn't need) when they can put it into STR? Chain shirt and Studded Leather come out the same, assuming the wearer has the max DEX.
Good point. You don't need to pump up DEX, so it's one stat to worry about.


DMM requires turning, which requires CHA. The common argument is that Clerics don't need CHA, so relying on DMM doesn't work. Either a Cleric can use DMM (and needs CHA), or they don't need CHA and can't DMM as much as everyone says.
Well, clerics doesn't *need* DMM to be powerful (only broken). But with 3 +cha uses a day, you could have Charisma 10 (+0), and still have 3 uses, more than enough for 3 of the most powerful spells. That without taking the Extra Turning feat, if you are desperate for turnings, or any item that increases charisma (mantle of charisma, ioun stone, rod of leadership)



For anything less important, you've still got the enhancement bonus of your weapon
As do Monks.
Which bonus? A cleric just needs to use a greater magic weapon, divine favor, and divine might (two of which you can already cast in the entrance of a dungeon) to out melee the fighter.



Like move to the back and take out the caster? Oh wait, Monks are useless, I forgot.

And how you expect to get there alive? You're likely to die half-way there, or killed by the caster's allies just as you get close. A rogue have a better chance of getting ther undetected, and take out the caster in one single move.



(splort) Please tell me you are kidding. Please. How else is a mid-level Batman supposed to control the battlefield if Batman is dead? (I say Batman since obviously melee classes are worthless compared to Batman.)
By not being hit at all? There's some very nasty tricks even a low-level wizard can use to get our of battle, short of being taken flat-footed or losing initiative.

Thing is: Wizards of the Coast messed up the monk, thinking it would be powerful. Turned out it isen't. Being able to fall 10ft without taking damage, or being able to speak any language is nothing compared to some class features out there. Even a fighter is kept on a low profile, because he only gets feats, and access to some weak exclusive abilities.
So, yes, monk is weak and underpowered, because of design flaws from the company. I'd allow a player use a swordsage anytime without problem and just call it a monk, because he does what the monk was supposed to be: a exoterical warrior with uncommon powers. The monk falls short of that.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:31 PM
Last I checked, we were discussing the monk.

That was in reference to you saying Bards have talents (spells, in this case) that can't be replicated.


False. your indicative item, the Robe of the Archmagi, is a Wondrous Item, not armor, and is therefore under a different set of rules.

Armor or wondrous item, the argument is still valid. Robes can be enchanted as armor. I am not saying you can put all the same stuff on robes (fortification, slick, etc); I'm still waiting for an answer if that is barred RAW or not. (Not saying it is or isn't. In this case, I don't know.)


The 3.5 game's options are focused mostly into prestige classes. Taking away that potential severely hampers ability growth.

OK. Tattooed Monk then. PrC that allows (actually I think requires) Monk. That's just a quick glance at 1 splat book. I know there are other PrC's for Monks.


14 Dex + 18 wis comes out to +6 AC, +4 of which appies when flat-footed. Full plate, unenchanted, with an unenchanted shield and a 12 Dex, makes +11 AC, +10 of which still applies when flat-footed.

Ranger:
18 DEX: +4
Chain Shirt: +4
AC 18, 4 of which still applies when flat-footed. (And that's assuming the Ranger raised their DEX to 18. It could be lower.)


Ah. So this has nothing to do with the "Monks can have armor enchantments on their robes" argument, and the monks still don't get fortification. OK.

It does have to do with the "monks can have armor enhancements on their robes." I don't know (and am hoping someone could tell me) about fortification, etc.


It doesn't have armor enhancements. It has abilities that are similar to armor enhancements.


Robe of the Archmagi
+5 armor bonus to AC.

afroakuma
2008-11-08, 05:32 PM
Fax said robes can't have armor enchantments. I only showed him that he is wrong.

That was the wrong thing to say. You are incorrect. And once again, all the same notes: attacking Clerics persistently, despite them being a spellcasting class. Neglecting the point made about a rogue's combat ability to point out a minor "yes, but." Now you're targeting bards as well. Why are you going so far out of your way to try to get us to reclassify monks from "sucks" to "underpowered but tolerable?"

Edit: Do you even understand what "Armor enhancement" means? It does not refer to an armor bonus, it refers to special armor abilities, such as reinforcement, which cannot be imparted to robes.

TRM
2008-11-08, 05:36 PM
Armor bonus not equal to armor enhancement. Bracers of Armor give an armor bonus, but they are not enhanced like armor. You can't make a +1 Robe of AC unless it is a wondrous item.

Gorbash
2008-11-08, 05:38 PM
Oh and you missed one very important part of Robe of Archmagi. It says:

Its wearer, IF AN ARCANE SPELLCASTER, gains the following powers:

+5 Armor Bonus to AC.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:42 PM
That was the wrong thing to say. You are incorrect.

I gave my evidence. Where's yours?


And once again, all the same notes: attacking Clerics persistently, despite them being a spellcasting class.

I didn't bring up Clerics.


Now you're targeting bards as well.

I brought up Bards only as a comparison. A valid argument has been made that Monks are jacks-of-all-trades and masters of none. However, the same has been said about Bards, yet no one says Bards are terrible. I asked why.


Why are you going so far out of your way to try to get us to reclassify monks from "sucks" to "underpowered but tolerable?"

If Monks suck, show me how they suck. I grant the jack-of-all-trades, but that doesn't mean they suck.


Edit: Do you even understand what "Armor enhancement" means? It does not refer to an armor bonus, it refers to special armor abilities, such as reinforcement, which cannot be imparted to robes.

Except armor bonuses CAN obviously be added to robes since the Robe of the Archmagi has one.


Oh and you missed one very important part of Robe of Archmagi. It says:

Its wearer, IF AN ARCANE SPELLCASTER, gains the following powers:

+5 Armor Bonus to AC.

And? I didn't say Monks can wear a Robe of the Archmagi. I said armor bonuses can be added to robes.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:42 PM
It does have to do with the "monks can have armor enhancements on their robes." I don't know (and am hoping someone could tell me) about fortification, etc.

Let's try this again.


To create magic armor, a character needs a heat source and some iron, wood, or leatherworking tools. He also needs a supply of materials, the most obvious being the armor or the pieces of the armor to be assembled. Armor to be made into magic armor must be masterwork armor, and the masterwork cost is added to the base price to determine final market value. Additional magic supplies costs for the materials are subsumed in the cost for creating the magic armor—half the base price of the item.

Note how Creating Magic Armor specifically indicates armor must be enchanted.


Padded, Leather, Studded Leather, Chain Shirt, Hide, Scale Mail, Chain Mail, Breastplate, Splint Mail, Banded Mail, Half Plate, Full Plate

Note how robe is not listed.


* One headband, hat, helmet, or phylactery on the head
* One pair of eye lenses or goggles on or over the eyes
* One amulet, brooch, medallion, necklace, periapt, or scarab around the neck
* One vest, vestment, or shirt on the torso
* One robe or suit of armor on the body (over a vest, vestment, or shirt)
* One belt around the waist (over a robe or suit of armor)
* One cloak, cape, or mantle around the shoulders (over a robe or suit of armor)
* One pair of bracers or bracelets on the arms or wrists
* One glove, pair of gloves, or pair of gauntlets on the hands
* One ring on each hand (or two rings on one hand)
* One pair of boots or shoes on the feet


Note how robes are explicitly delineated as different from armor.


This is a catch-all category for anything that doesn’t fall into the other groups. Anyone can use a wondrous item (unless specified otherwise in the description).

Since robes are not delineated as armor, they fall under Wondrous Item rules. As such, you cannot apply an armor ability to a robe. Also note how every magical robe in the SRD is listed under Wondrous Items.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:45 PM
Let's try this again.
Since robes are not delineated as armor, they fall under Wondrous Item rules. As such, you cannot apply an armor ability to a robe. Also note how every magical robe in the SRD is listed under Wondrous Items.

Except the Robe of the Archmagi has an armor bonus.

Fine, a robe for a monk is a wondrous item rather than armor. It can still be enchanted with an armor bonus.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:48 PM
Except the Robe of the Archmagi has an armor bonus.

Fine, a Monk's Robe is a wonderous item rather than armor. It can still be enchanted with an armor bonus.

AAAAAAAAAAGH.

JUST BECAUSE IT HAS AN ARMOR BONUS DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN ENCHANT IT AS ARMOR.

Bracers of armor are a wondrous item and provide an armor bonus--but they are not armor. A ring of shield is a ring provides a shield bonus to AC--but it is not a shield. Mage armor is a spell that gives an armor bonus to AC--but is not actually armor. Two-Weapon Defense is a feat that gives a shield bonus to AC--but is not actually a shield. A bonus type does not an item make.

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 05:50 PM
Except the Robe of the Archmagi has an armor bonus.

Fine, a robe for a monk is a wondrous item rather than armor. It can still be enchanted with an armor bonus.

Then it would be homebrew. We are discussing RAW.

ninjaed by Fax...

Comparing monks and bards is comparing apples and pears. Monks are supposed to be meleers. Bards are skillmonkeys with some unique arcane spells, oh and yes, they are about 10x more powerful than monks using splatbooks, google "Words of Creation"

TRM
2008-11-08, 05:50 PM
Except the Robe of the Archmagi has an armor bonus.

Fine, a robe for a monk is a wondrous item rather than armor. It can still be enchanted with an armor bonus.


Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses). All magic armor is also masterwork armor, reducing armor check penalties by 1.


An armor bonus applies to Armor Class and is granted by armor or by a spell or magical effect that mimics armor. Armor bonuses stack with all other bonuses to Armor Class (even with natural armor bonuses) except other armor bonuses. An armor bonus doesn't apply against touch attacks, except for armor bonuses granted by force effects (such as the mage armor spell) which apply against incorporeal touch attacks, such as that of a shadow.

Magic armor bonuses aren't the same as normal armor bonuses. Robe of the Archmagi gives an armor bonus. It is not the same as a magic armor bonus.
The same applies for Bracers of Armor, as I pointed out in a previous post.

streakster
2008-11-08, 05:52 PM
Except the Robe of the Archmagi has an armor bonus.

Fine, a robe for a monk is a wondrous item rather than armor. It can still be enchanted with an armor bonus.

And thus was it discovered that if you changed the rules of the game entirely, Monks were no longer horrible.

afroakuma
2008-11-08, 05:52 PM
Except armor bonuses CAN obviously be added to robes since the Robe of the Archmagi has one.

I will explain this as thoroughly as I can, and then you will very kindly admit to Fax, myself et. al that you were incorrect:

An armor bonus is an enhancement to AC. It can be provided by any sort of magical thing that you could possibly employ.

Armor enchantments are the set of special armor abilities that are listed in the DMG. They can only be placed on armor, and armor alone. These include reinforcement, energy resistance, slick, invulnerability et. al

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:52 PM
AAAAAAAAAAGH.

JUST BECAUSE IT HAS AN ARMOR BONUS DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN ENCHANT IT AS ARMOR.

Bracers of armor are a wondrous item and provide an armor bonus--but they are not armor. A ring of shield is a ring provides a shield bonus to AC--but it is not a shield. Mage armoris a spell that gives an armor bonus to AC--but is not actually armor. A bonus type does not an item make.

(deep breath) We got way off track here...

The point is, robes for a Monk can be enchanted with armor bonuses. I will grant that they are not "armor," but they can be enchanted to act as armor when it comes to adding to AC.

I just realized I think you were trying to answer my question about adding things like fortification, etc. If so, I am sorry for the confusion and will grant that it doesn't seem that those things could be added.


And thus was it discovered that if you changed the rules of the game entirely, Monks were no longer horrible.

I am not changing the rules. Per the SRD, armor bonuses can be added to robes because armor bonuses are on robes.

BRC
2008-11-08, 05:54 PM
Note, I have not read this thread.
Personally I think Monk's do have a place in DnD, they make excellent enemies for the PC's to fight.

They need less magic items than other classes, and some of the one's they do need work best for Monks. This makes it easier for the DM to calculate encounter loot (without mixing up the CR-loot tables and the NPC WBL tables). This is mainly for low-levels where a masterwork longsword is valuable loot.

They have good saves and (eventually) SR, meaning that the Players can't just use Save-or-Die/lose/suck spells to take care of the encounter in one round...Much. Evasion means that they can be effective in large numbers.

Flurry of Blows encourages PC's to stay mobile rather than engaging in full-attack slugfests. This makes fights more intresting than people just standing around hitting each other.

Slow Fall allows for cool entrances as the Mooks ambush the PC's without the DM having to worry about giving them somebody to cast slow-fall.

Fast movement means the PC's can't just run away from the fight.

Quivering Palm is pretty much useless for PC's who are going to be fighting more than once a week. For an NPC however who is only there for one fight, it can be a major boon.

The best part about Monk's is that pretty much everything you need for them is on one page. If a DM needs to pull some class-leveled opponents out of thin air, they can just look at the monk page and keep things fairly consistant, rather than flipping back and forwards between the class page, the feats chapter, the equipment chapter, ect. It's just generally easier.

That is why I say the true purpose of the Monk was to be an NPC class for lazy DM's.

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 05:55 PM
I gave my evidence. Where's yours?
If Monks suck, show me how they suck. I grant the jack-of-all-trades, but that doesn't mean they suck.


Monks aren't jack-of-all-trades. All they can do is run around and punch stuff. Bards and Factotums have a degree of versatility a monk can never achieve.

Gorbash
2008-11-08, 05:55 PM
And thus was it discovered that if you changed the rules of the game entirely, Monks were no longer horrible.

Well, they aren't horrible if you let them buy partially charged wands of divine power and Masterwork Tools for UMD, too. :smallbiggrin:

AdamSmasher
2008-11-08, 05:56 PM
I don't see what all the monk hate is about. Sure, PHB monks suck... but has anyone seen the Chaos Monk variant from Dragon Magazine?

Flurry of blows grants between two and SIX attacks. You get the ability to give everyone attacking you a 50% ADDITIONAL miss chance, you get to daze people every time you charge... it's crazy.

And if you don't like those abilities, you can always prestige into psionic fist to get the things that make psychic warriors crazy.

And for a more rogue-like roll, you can always take a few rogue levels and then prestige into Master of the South Wind.

And have you people ever heard of Dragon descendant? AoO EVERY SINGLE TIME someone attacks you, and stacks with monk unarmed damage.



Intuitive Attack is like weapon finesse, it just uses wisdom. It's not hard to get by with just wisdom and dexterity. You can always stack size modifiers for damage (I made a monk who did 100 damage per attack off of dice alone).





So, yeah. A basic, pure monk sucks. But when you use variants and/or prestige them, they're terrifying.

TRM
2008-11-08, 05:56 PM
(deep breath) We got way off track here...

The point is, robes for a Monk can be enchanted with armor bonuses. I will grant that they are not "armor," but they can be enchanted to act as armor when it comes to adding to AC.

I just realized I think you were trying to answer my question about adding things like fortification, etc. If so, I am sorry for the confusion and will grant that it doesn't seem that those things could be added.
Not quite.
Let's phrase it this way: monks can purchase certain magical items that add armor bonuses to AC.

The problem with this scheme is that the bonuses will be considerably lower, and more expensive per point of bonus, than normal magical armor. Bracers of Armor +1 (I really love using this example) cost 2,000 gp and provide a +1 armor bonus. A chain shirt costs 100 gp and provides a +4 armor bonus. Which is better?

edit:

I am not changing the rules. Per the SRD, armor bonuses can be added to robes because armor bonuses are on robes.
Please look over the responses given you on this point, especially those given by Fax and myself.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 05:57 PM
I am waiting for a response to my posts. As I do so, I'll make up character sheets for a Druid's AC and a Monk at levels 5 and 10. I'll build the Monk with 28 PB and then you and the playground can compare the 2 of them. Both builds will probably be mostly Core+SpC&MIC, just for simplicity, and I won't spend more than 1/4th of the Druid's WBL on the AC, and won't use any buffs that aren't hours/level.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 05:57 PM
Monks aren't jack-of-all-trades. All they can do is run around and punch stuff. Bards and Factotums have a degree of versatility a monk can never achieve.

I'm not the one that said Monks are jacks-of-all-trades. That was a common statement throughout this thread.


Not quite.
The problem with this scheme is that the bonuses will be considerably lower, and more expensive per point of bonus, than normal magical armor. Bracers of Armor +1 (I really love using this example) cost 2,000 gp and provide a +1 armor bonus. A chain shirt costs 100 gp and provides a +4 armor bonus. Which is better?

I would much rather have the Bracers if I was playing a Monk (or Wizard, or Sorc) :smallsmile:, but I know that isn't what you were asking.

The issue seems to have been confusion on my part on what you all were saying. I thought the argument was "Monks have crappy AC because the only way to raise it is by raising WIS and DEX because they can't wear armor." I was pointing out that robes can be enchanted to add to AC (just like bracers, et al. ) Looking at it now, I realize that isn't what you all were saying, and I apologize for going off on a tangent.

I grant Monks will have a lower AC since they can only get AC from DEX, WIS, and armor bonuses on items.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 05:59 PM
I just realized I think you were trying to answer my question about adding things like fortification, etc. If so, I am sorry for the confusion and will grant that it doesn't seem that those things could be added.

Yes, that is the case. Which is a Big Deal™. It means a monk is vulnerable to crits 100% of the time instead of 75% or 50% like someone in light fortification or fortification armor would be. It means a monk can't get armor that's resistant to energy damage or provides Spell Resistance or Damage Reduction or teleportation or flight or water breathing or any number of things. It means the monk has a whole item slot that he can no longer use, which is a huge disadvantage, especially when it's one of the most versatile item slots in the game. Losing your armor slot for Wis-to-AC is like taking Vow of Poverty-lite: you lose a lot of versatility for some very fixed bonuses that you can't change later if you need to.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-08, 06:01 PM
Note, I have not read this thread.
Personally I think Monk's do have a place in DnD, they make excellent enemies for the PC's to fight.

<snip>

That is why I say the true purpose of the Monk was to be an NPC class for lazy DM's.

http://ffrpg.republika.pl/approve.PNG



So, yeah. A basic, pure monk sucks. But when you use variants and/or prestige them, they're terrifying.

With enough effort, you can turn everything into a powerhouse. Even a CW Samurai.

streakster
2008-11-08, 06:01 PM
Well, they aren't horrible if you let them buy partially charged wands of divine power and Masterwork Tools for UMD, too. :smallbiggrin:

As I said...:smallbiggrin:

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 06:01 PM
Note, I have not read this thread.
Personally I think Monk's do have a place in DnD, they make excellent enemies for the PC's to fight.

They need less magic items than other classes, and some of the one's they do need work best for Monks. This makes it easier for the DM to calculate encounter loot (without mixing up the CR-loot tables and the NPC WBL tables). This is mainly for low-levels where a masterwork longsword is valuable loot.


I think you misunderstand the Monk: he needs more not less magic items. These are needed to make up for his weaknesses (almost everything?).

Druid is the the one who needs the least I think.

Also back to main topic:
Robes don't grant armor bonuses to AC to non-spellcaster.
You could argue Bracers, but Robes in the examples don't.

Gorbash
2008-11-08, 06:02 PM
The point is, robes for a Monk can be enchanted with armor bonuses. I will grant that they are not "armor," but they can be enchanted to act as armor when it comes to adding to AC.

No, they can't. Nowhere does it say that they can (and try to pull off that 'where does it say that they can't?' trick, because that doesn't work in dnd. If it says you can do it, you can, if it's not listed, you can't). When you find a paragraph where it says that a robe can be enchanted like an armor, then we can talk. Just because Robe of Archmagi gives it, doesn't mean that any robe can. Also, the name of that robe isn't +5 Robe of Archmagi, it's just Robe of Archmagi. Furthermore, the robe doesn't actually give the armor bonus, it gives an arcane spellcaster the following powers:

+5 Armor bonus
...

So, it's a power that the character gets, not an actual enchantment on the robe.

Evil DM Mark3
2008-11-08, 06:04 PM
Having played a Monk in the past I can sum up the answer to the question in the title with three words. Because They Are. I have only once ever asked to change characters after starting the game and that is the one time I tried to play a monk.

Eldariel
2008-11-08, 06:04 PM
Robes can act as Bracers of Armor (as per Magic Item Compendium), not as an actual Armor. In other words, you're burning infinite money on infinidecimal AC boosts.

BRC
2008-11-08, 06:05 PM
I think you misunderstand the Monk: he needs more not less magic items. These are needed to make up for his weaknesses (almost everything?).

True, but many of those magic items can be simulated by DM sneakyness so they don't actually have to give them to the players. You can give a monk some gauntlets of ogre strength and an amulet of mighty fists without actually giving it to them, just giving them a strength score and enhancement bonus to their attacks as if they had those scores, and the PC's won't know. It's harder to do that with, say, a +1 Flaming Greatsword. And some magic items (Like the Monk's Belt) are pretty much useless for everybody else, so you don't really have to count them as treasure.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 06:06 PM
True, but many of those magic items can be simulated by DM sneakyness so they don't actually have to give them to the players. You can give a monk some gauntlets of ogre strength and an amulet of mighty fists without actually giving it to them, just giving them a strength score and enhancement bonus to their attacks as if they had those scores, and the PC's won't know. It's harder to do that with, say, a +1 Flaming Greatsword. And some magic items (Like the Monk's Belt) are pretty much useless for everybody else, so you don't really have to count them as treasure.

Wait, what?
Monk's Belt are awesome for non-Monks. Wis to AC for everyone!
Clerics and Druids love them.

Clerics less so because they can wear Heavy armor, but Druids at leaat in animal form.

Kurald Galain
2008-11-08, 06:14 PM
I didn't know Giaco had a brother...

/me munches popcorn.

monty
2008-11-08, 06:17 PM
About the Robes of the Archmagi:

The Robes are a wondrous item with an armor bonus as one of their abilities, not an enhancement bonus to armor. Creating a different wondrous item with an armor bonus would be a custom magic item, which is not RAW. Sure, a DM letting you have that item would make the monk better, but the DM letting you take a custom feat that gives the monk Wildshape would make it better too. It doesn't make the monk not suck as a class.

Mephit
2008-11-08, 06:17 PM
So, yeah. A basic, pure monk sucks. But when you use variants and/or prestige them, they're terrifying.

Not true. I'll take your all-splat book monk on with my core caster anyday.
And if I get to use a couple of splatbooks too, I'll do the same with any other core class.

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 06:18 PM
So, you admitted that they have lower AC, can't have armor enhancements, deal less damage than a fighter and aren't versatile?

Anything else supposed to be decent about them?

monty
2008-11-08, 06:19 PM
The argument I was making is that it is obviously possible to enchant armor bonuses onto robes (as in adds to AC) since there is a robe that adds to AC.

As I said, yes, it's possible. But it's still a custom item, which has no place in a discussion of RAW.

Mephit
2008-11-08, 06:20 PM
Come to think of it, in which power category does a monk fall, if he gets to use all source books? :smallconfused:

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 06:21 PM
So, you admitted that they have lower AC, can't have armor enhancements, deal less damage than a fighter and aren't versatile?

Anything else supposed to be decent about them?

As others have said, they can do a little of one thing and a little of another, but no one thing well. I can agree with them being underpowered, but I still do not see "suck."

"Suck" fits CW Samari and Truenamers, but I don't see how Monks fall to that level. Then again, "suck" is a relative term. What one person calls underpowered, another calls "suck."

And that may be the best answer... (shrug)

monty
2008-11-08, 06:22 PM
Come to think of it, in which power category does a monk fall, if he gets to use all source books? :smallconfused:

Well, with enough splatbooks and a sufficiently intelligent person building it, most characters fall into the 9000+ power category. Monks, though, I'm not sure.

BRC
2008-11-08, 06:24 PM
Wait, what?
Monk's Belt are awesome for non-Monks. Wis to AC for everyone!
Clerics and Druids love them.

Clerics less so because they can wear Heavy armor, but Druids at leaat in animal form.
True. Okay, Monk's mess with the CR-loot system just as much as any other class-leveled enemy (Except at low-levels where selling mundane weapons and armor is actually worthwhile), but my other points stand.

Gorbash
2008-11-08, 06:24 PM
Well, if you don't trust us, you could trust the whole population of Gleemax, who made this:

Avg.
Wizard 9.67
Archivist 9.63
Artificer 9.39
Druid 9.38
Cleric 9.16
Psion 8.35
Sorcerer 8.20
Erudite 8.15
Beguiler 7.79
Wu Jen 7.58
Spirit Shaman 7.29
Favored Soul 7.23
Dread Necromancer 7.10
Ardent 7.07
Warblade 6.88
Crusader 6.62
Swordsage 6.55
Wilder 6.46
Shugenja 6.44
Dragonfire Adept 6.29
Duskblade 6.09
Psychic Warrior 6.02
Warlock 6.00
Factotum 5.98
Binder 5.96
Totemist 5.64
Rogue 5.62
Bard 5.45
Warmage 5.41
Scout 5.27
Shadowcaster 5.03
Barbarian 4.99
Ranger 4.94
Incarnate 4.94
Lurk 4.79
Dragon Shaman 4.61
Knight 4.27
Swashbuckler 4.24
Paladin 4.22
Soulborn 4.15
Ninja 3.97
Fighter 3.88
Hexblade 3.81
Divine Mind 3.67
Marshal 3.66
Adept 3.60
Monk 3.51
Healer 3.21
Spellthief 3.16
Truenamer 2.66
Expert 2.40
Soulknife 2.35
Samurai 1.69
Warrior 1.67
Aristocrat 1.40
Commoner 0.60

Mephit
2008-11-08, 06:26 PM
As others have said, they can do a little of one thing and a little of another, but no one thing well. I can agree with them being underpowered, but I still do not see "suck."

"Suck" fits CW Samari and Truenamers, but I don't see how Monks fall to that level. Then again, "suck" is a relative term. What one person calls underpowered, another calls "suck."

And that may be the best answer... (shrug)

Oh my. I thought you were just making a point about all the (perhaps slightly overdone) jokes about monks.

The monk definitely falls to that level, sorry. It's more versatile than those two classes I suppose, but it's still a horrible choice.


Well, with enough splatbooks and a sufficiently intelligent person building it, most characters fall into the 9000+ power category. Monks, though, I'm not sure.

I meant obvious cheese aside, of course.

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 06:26 PM
Well, if you don't trust us, you could trust the whole population of Gleemax, who made this:

Cnt. Avg. SD Med. Mode Min/Max Spread
Wizard 42 9.67 0.45 10.00 10.00 9/10 1
Archivist 38 9.63 0.62 10.00 10.00 7/10 3
Artificer 37 9.39 0.76 10.00 10.00 8/10 2
Druid 41 9.38 0.65 9.50 10.00 8/10 2
Cleric 42 9.16 0.76 9.00 9.00 7/10 3
Psion 32 8.35 0.73 8.00 8.00 7/10 3
Sorcerer 39 8.20 1.01 8.00 8.00 4/10 6
Erudite 11 8.15 1.35 9.00 9.00 5/9.5 4.5
Beguiler 34 7.79 0.73 8.00 8.00 6/9 3
Wu Jen 20 7.58 0.94 8.00 8.00 5/9 4
Spirit Shaman 21 7.29 1.95 7.00 9.00 3/10 7
Favored Soul 30 7.23 1.03 7.00 8.00 5/9 4
Dread Necromancer 30 7.10 1.16 7.00 7.00 3/10 7
Ardent 12 7.07 1.31 7.00 6.00 5/9 4
Warblade 35 6.88 0.90 7.00 7.00 4/8 4
Crusader 37 6.62 1.12 7.00 7.00 4/8 4
Swordsage 34 6.55 0.89 6.82 6.00 5/8 3
Wilder 16 6.46 1.76 7.00 7.00 3/10 7
Shugenja 19 6.44 1.26 7.00 7.00 4/8 4
Dragonfire Adept 23 6.29 0.92 6.00 7.00 4/8 4
Duskblade 34 6.09 0.87 6.00 6.00 4/8 4
Psychic Warrior 32 6.02 1.18 6.00 6.00 3/8 5
Warlock 38 6.00 0.90 6.00 6.00 4/8 4
Factotum 31 5.98 1.02 6.00 6.00 4/8 4
Binder 28 5.96 1.37 6.00 6.00 3/8 5
Totemist 14 5.64 1.28 5.50 5.00 3/7 4
Rogue 39 5.62 1.27 5.00 5.00 3/8 5
Bard 38 5.45 1.52 6.00 6.00 1/8 7
Warmage 37 5.41 1.62 6.00 7.00 1/9 8
Scout 36 5.27 1.03 5.00 6.00 3/7 4
Shadowcaster 22 5.03 1.79 5.13 4.00 2/8 6
Barbarian 39 4.99 1.16 5.00 5.00 2/8 6
Ranger 39 4.94 1.07 5.00 5.00 2/7 5
Incarnate 11 4.94 1.14 5.00 4.00 3/7 4
Lurk 11 4.79 1.64 4.00 4.00 2/8 6
Dragon Shaman 26 4.61 1.44 5.00 5.00 2/7 5
Knight 37 4.27 1.03 4.00 4.00 3/6 3
Swashbuckler 37 4.24 1.36 4.00 5.00 1/7 6
Paladin 40 4.22 1.15 4.00 5.00 1/6 5
Soulborn 11 4.15 1.15 4.00 4.00 3/7 4
Ninja 33 3.97 1.29 4.00 4.00 2/8 6
Fighter 41 3.88 1.41 4.00 4.00 1/8 7
Hexblade 36 3.81 1.33 3.50 3.00 2/7 5
Divine Mind 11 3.67 2.30 3.00 3.00 1/8 7
Marshal 29 3.66 1.17 4.00 3.00 2/6 4
Adept 5 3.60 1.52 3.00 3.00 2/6 4
Monk 41 3.51 1.38 3.00 3.00 2/8 6
Healer 29 3.21 2.06 3.00 2.00 1/9 8
Spellthief 29 3.16 1.20 3.00 4.00 1/6 5
Truenamer 18 2.66 1.68 2.93 3.00 0/6 6
Expert 5 2.40 0.55 2.00 2.00 2/3 1
Soulknife 25 2.35 1.22 2.00 2.00 0/5 5
Samurai 37 1.69 0.66 2.00 2.00 1/3 2
Warrior 6 1.67 0.82 1.50 1.00 1/3 2
Aristocrat 5 1.40 0.55 1.00 1.00 1/2 1
Commoner 5 0.60 0.55 1.00 1.00 0/1 1

OK, what is that?

streakster
2008-11-08, 06:26 PM
As others have said, they can do a little of one thing and a little of another, but no one thing well. I can agree with them being underpowered, but I still do not see "suck."

"Suck" fits CW Samari and Truenamers, but I don't see how Monks fall to that level. Then again, "suck" is a relative term. What one person calls underpowered, another calls "suck."

And that may be the best answer... (shrug)

Aaaaaaaaaaaand redefinition of terms. That's a wrap, folks!

Kesnit
2008-11-08, 06:28 PM
Aaaaaaaaaaaand redefinition of terms. That's a wrap, folks!

(chuckle) Hard to redefine what is never defined. :smallsmile:

Does "suck" mean "unplayable" or "useless?" If so, Monks don't suck, esp if your party isn't full of overpowered, overoptimized characters. Does "suck" mean "not the best class" If so, yes, Monks "suck."

I was defining "suck" as the first (which I guess I should have said to start with, rather than have everyone make their own definition).

Gorbash
2008-11-08, 06:31 PM
Class rating of all the core class, ranked from top to bottom, this first number (I edited it a bit) is their average mark. So, as you see, monk are on the bottom of the food chain, and by continuing to argue, you're not actually proving anything. You asked why do they suck, you got your answer.

Flickerdart
2008-11-08, 06:32 PM
(chuckle) Hard to redefine what is never defined. :smallsmile:
That's not the point, really. The point is, whenever anyone is forced to say "ok, sure, but _____ is a relative term", then the thread descends into a battle between dictionaries. Which is pointless. So generally, when threads get to that point, then that is in fact a wrap...nothing intelligent will ever come out of the pit, except possibly some laconic lines.

monty
2008-11-08, 06:33 PM
Notice that monks are rated just below the Adept, a NPC class.

monty
2008-11-08, 06:34 PM
nothing intelligent will ever come out of the pit, except possibly some laconic lines.

And flaming. Bans all around!

Flashlight
2008-11-08, 06:35 PM
Quoting from google search:

"Sucks is the most concise, emphatic way we have to say something is no good. As a one-syllable intransitive verb, it offers superb economy."

Is it no good? Yes -> it sucks

wrap

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 06:36 PM
Notice that monks are rated just below the Adept, a NPC class.

Adepts have Polymorph: isn't that enough to almost PC grade?

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 06:37 PM
Adepts have Polymorph: isn't that enough to almost PC grade?

They also have arcane healing.

monty
2008-11-08, 06:39 PM
Adepts have Polymorph: isn't that enough to almost PC grade?

Presumably, you're playing in a party, and someone in the party can cast Polymorph. Being able to cast it yourself isn't a big deal. Spellcasting power is more defined by offensive abilities and personal buffs.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 06:40 PM
They also have arcane healing.

Your right, they get heal, the best healing spell.

Monty:


Presumably, you're playing in a party, and someone in the party can cast Polymorph. Being able to cast it yourself isn't a big deal. Spellcasting power is more defined by offensive abilities and personal buffs.

If Monks could cast Polymorph: I'd rate them better.

afroakuma
2008-11-08, 06:46 PM
Now I'm just plain interested in that chart. I'd love to know how that was compiled. How much number crunching had to be done for that? :smallbiggrin: It's just awesome.

Vortling
2008-11-08, 06:52 PM
Now I'm just plain interested in that chart. I'd love to know how that was compiled. How much number crunching had to be done for that? :smallbiggrin: It's just awesome.

I believe it's compiled ratings from hundreds of gamers on the forums. There was also a similar chart compiled with classes rated on how fun a class was to play.

Kurald Galain
2008-11-08, 07:03 PM
Does "suck" mean "unplayable" or "useless?" If so, Monks don't suck, esp if your party isn't full of overpowered, overoptimized characters. Does "suck" mean "not the best class" If so, yes, Monks "suck."

"Suck" might be subjective, but "worst class in the player's handbook" is not.

And bringing in base classes from other books doesn't help either. What comes below the monk? Four of the NPC classes, which are intentionally designed as bad; the truenamer, spellthief and soulknife, which suffer from severe design flaws; the why-am-I-not-a-fighter samurai; and the one-trick-pony boring healer. This is a bottom-tier class, and "bottom tier" is really a polite phrase for "suck". QED.

Fax Celestis
2008-11-08, 07:16 PM
spellthief

LIES. I'm going to assume you meant "samurai".

Starbuck_II
2008-11-08, 07:30 PM
LIES. I'm going to assume you meant "samurai".

Why would he say Samura twice? :smallbiggrin:

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 07:33 PM
Here we go. The AC (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=90758)(one class feature) of a 5th level Druid, using the Natural Bond feat and 1/4th of it's master's WBL, and a Monk (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=90757).

Both fairly optimized, they come out to be about even. The Monk, using Flaws, deals more damage, with fewer attacks and a worse chance to hit. The AC has better AC, but worse flat-footed and touch AC. The AC has more skill boosts, but fewer actual skill points, meaning it's better at this point, but that would change in a few levels(note, this is the AC, the Druid would have it's own skills and modifiers). The Grapple checks are about even, with the Monk having +1 before FoB. Saves are similar, with the AC getting better Reflex and worse Will. The AC is faster, too. The Monk has more odd abilities, but the AC's are better, IMHO(Rake, Pounce, Improved Grab), giving an edge to the AC. However, I want to point out again, that the Druid so far has cast one spell and taken one feat, spending <1/4th WBL, while the Monk has optimized his entire build. Pretty bad for the Monk.

lord_khaine
2008-11-08, 07:43 PM
gahh, thats why i hate the monk threads, you turn your back on the discussion for a couple of hours, and there are 3 new pages, where it manages to move from discussion to flaming.

that aside, you are abusing the natural bond feat with the druid, and the monk really isnt very optimised, if i build a fighter like that, then the animal companion would proberly be able to beat him as well.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-08, 07:45 PM
gahh, thats why i hate the monk threads, you turn your back on the discussion for a couple of hours, and there are 3 new pages, where it manages to move from discussion to flaming.

that aside, you are abusing the natural bond feat with the druid, and the monk really isnt very optimised, if i build a fighter like that, then the animal companion would proberly be able to beat him as well.If you would like to build a Monk better, using only one flaw and 28PB, be my guest. I was trying to stay mostly core for simplicity.

And Natural Bond works that way just fine.

AmberVael
2008-11-08, 07:52 PM
Why would he say Samura twice? :smallbiggrin:

Because it is so bad that one time can't cut it. :smalltongue:

Collin152
2008-11-08, 07:54 PM
Why would he say Samura twice? :smallbiggrin:

They dual wield suck, why shouldn't you mention them for both?

busterswd
2008-11-08, 08:08 PM
Kesnit, you've been answering your own question. The crux of your argument involves careful planning and extra item expenses to bring up the monk to a merely adequate level.

Flickerdart
2008-11-08, 09:36 PM
Kesnit, you've been answering your own question. The crux of your argument involves careful planning and extra item expenses to bring up the monk to a merely adequate level.
No, to bring it up to par with only a class feature. The Druid also casts like crazy and Shapeshifts into things both deadly and very deadly. All out of the box, it needs no optimizing to do these things. You have to crank the Monk to do only a small part of what a Druid does.

Greenfaun
2008-11-08, 09:44 PM
I'm not caught up in the thread yet, but I want to reply to this part:


Kesnit, what are you looking for, exactly?
Someone to tell me why Monks suck.
(snip)
...There is a big difference between "underpowered" and "suck." ...
(snip)
... those arguments do not mean Monks suck.

Kesnit: So... is the problem here your personal definition of the word "suck"?

Is that all?

Look, sucking is subjective. It's literally impossible to PROVE that something sucks or doesn't suck. It's opinion.

People who say "monks suck" dislike monks for some reason. Clearly, you don't share their dislike, and therefore, to you, monks don't suck.

There are lots of reasons for people to dislike monks, and therefore assert suckitude. Some of the reasons are:

*Mechanical weakness: This one's been done to death, and it looks like it's about to be done to death in this thread too. Anyway, for some people, these two sentences mean exactly the same thing: "Monks are the mechanically weakest core PC class." and "Monks suck." Clearly, you're not one of those people.

*Design inconsistency: This is more of an aesthetic objection (or whatever passes for aesthetics among game-design nerds). Basically, monks show evidence of being designed to do two different, conflicting things, and so they end up not being specialized. Having the game do the specialization for you is pretty much the whole reason for playing a class-based game instead of a point-buy style (well, there are others, but work with me here) and so monks are jarring in their ill-suitedness for any particular combat role.

*Verisimilitude double standard: Another design issue, closely related to the one above. The more classic example is Fighters vs Wizards. Some classes, like fighters and rogues, only get special abilities that are mechanical representations of things real people can do. World-class athletes or acrobats, sure, but still real, or at least realistic, grounded in real-world physics and biology. Overtly magical classes, however, get to do impossible things right away, and eventually become so powerful that it's just silly to compare them to the ones who are stuck doing only possible things. It's interesting that they totally rejected this "Magic is just different" attitude in 4E, but in 3E it's in full effect. Monks are held to realistic standards in their martial abilities, but they're also "mystical" characters who get some weird bonus abilities, so for some reason, probably "Balance" or "Niche Protection" they start out fragile and less useful, like wizards. Unfortunately, they also follow the "realistic abilities" power-curve like fighters, instead of the rocket to godliness like full casters, so they're screwed coming AND going.

*Finally, setting implications. Some people still haven't gotten over the idea of overtly Asian-flavored mystical martial artists in their Medieval-Europe-with-dragons setting. Personally, I think this is pretty ridiculous, but this is the reason monks "suck" for quite a few people I've seen on the internet.

All those reasons, though, don't mean you can't play a monk and enjoy it, or contribute to the game if you do. No mechanical argument can make you dislike monks if you love 'em, and no hypothetical supermonk based on partially-charged wands and questionable rules interpretations will make you like them if you think they suck.

This will probably have no effect on the huge argument over minutiae like wands and gauntlets and enchanted robes and solid fog that is sure to come, but I thought I'd try.

EDIT:

Does "suck" mean "unplayable" or "useless?" If so, Monks don't suck, esp if your party isn't full of overpowered, overoptimized characters. Does "suck" mean "not the best class" If so, yes, Monks "suck."

I was defining "suck" as the first (which I guess I should have said to start with, rather than have everyone make their own definition).

Woops, guess I should've read the whole thread after all. Oh well, another superfluous forum post from me. D'oh.

Tokiko Mima
2008-11-09, 12:21 AM
Question: I thought you could add armor enhancement properties to Bracers of Armor? It was 3.0 rules, but I think the Arms and Equipment guide had a section on the rules for doing so, so technically a Monk could have Fortification if they needed it.

Actually, it's a neat trick I used for a level 15+ pixie warlock with a super high Dexterity bonus. I had him wear some of the really light hide armor from Races of the Wild (Thistledown?) with an AC bonus of only 1 and a total armor enhancement bonus of +7 (+5 as the enhancement bonus, and +1each for Nimbleness and Ghost Ward.) Then I had the pixie also buy a pair of Bracers of Armor with a bonus of +10, with +5 of the bonus going towards Heavy (100%) Fortification. This way the Pixie got his full bonus to Dexterity, +5 AC Armor, +5 Armor enhancement, immunity to criticals and both Dexterity and the enhancement bonus counted against touch attacks thanks to Ghost Ward. And all it cost was the equivalent of your average magic weapon at that level, which I didn't need because I was a warlock. :smallsmile:

monty
2008-11-09, 12:24 AM
Even so, a +3 Heavy Fortification Bracers of Armor give you +3 to armor. +3 Heavy Fortification Chain Shirt gives you +7 AC for essentially the same cost, and has a max Dex and ACP negligible for most characters.

Also, Bracers of Armor only go up to +8.

Demons_eye
2008-11-09, 12:52 AM
I havent read all this thread yet but my monks are normal like this (if BoED is allowed)

Saint la 2/monk11/FoF3/x4
Feats are:
SuS(Tob)
Improved natural attack
snap kick(ToB)
Intuitive Attack(BoED)

Magical item:monks belt

Unarmed damge looks like what 6d10?

9 fast healing
Wisdom to ac twice
Con to ac
Wisdom to hit

Edit: I find it fun that when I looked in the online DnD game there was no monks! Then I thought extra speed no need to get better weapons they would be fun and maybe overpowered online.

Tokiko Mima
2008-11-09, 01:01 AM
Even so, a +3 Heavy Fortification Bracers of Armor give you +3 to armor. +3 Heavy Fortification Chain Shirt gives you +7 AC for essentially the same cost, and has a max Dex and ACP negligible for most characters.

Also, Bracers of Armor only go up to +8.

True, but the Arms and Equipment Guide section I'm referring to (I found it! It was on page 130) also has prices for Bracers of Armor up into the +13 range. Of course, it also rules that you can't have an AC bonus from Bracers of Armor greater than +8, so you have to spend the additional AC on special armor properties.

The reason I didn't save money with a straight chain shirt is that it hurts my Dexterity bonus to AC (Maximum DEX bonus in Armor, remember?), so the Pixie would experience an overall loss of AC, especially touch attack AC, which was what I was trying to optimize. Pixies have very high Dexterity bonuses (they have a +8 racial bonus to Dexterity) and this ones was +11, I believe. That's why I needed the work around in order to get the full benefit from all different sources of Armor Class.

The extra cost of doing this was leveraged against the warlocks lack of an expensive weapon so it didn't hurt him overall. :smallsmile:

streakster
2008-11-09, 01:11 AM
True, but the Arms and Equipment Guide section I'm referring to (I found it! It was on page 130) also has prices for Bracers of Armor up into the +13 range.

The reason I didn't save money with a straight chain shirt is that it hurts my Dexterity bonus to AC (Maximum DEX bonus in Armor, remember?), so the Pixie would experience an overall loss of AC, especially touch attack AC, which was what I was trying to optimize. Pixies have very high Dexterity bonuses (they have a +8 racial bonus to Dexterity) and this ones was +11, I believe. That's why I needed the work around in order to get the full benefit from all different sources of Armor Class.

The extra cost was leveraged against the warlocks lack of an expensive weapon so it didn't hurt him overall.

Ah, Pixie Warlocks. Quite possibly one of the most awesome things in DnD.

Especially if you deliver monologues about devouring souls and serving your dark masters in a high, squeaky voice.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 01:21 AM
All I see here is

"Monk sucks if the other class(X) stops doing what they are supposed to be doing and do what the monk does."

Grats, your playing a monk now.

Lol. Love it.

I have to say, Even I (a relative champion of monks) find them underpowered, but I must admit they get the "Suck" claim more than they deserve. All of their skills are useful at some point, (except possibly the level 20 add on.) They're capable of a lot of different things, which, (with the exception of casters) no one in the party can do all of as well. They have a lot of spell like abilities that are on constantly by the end, as opposed to needing to mysteriously have suddenly had it prepared all along.

Tokiko Mima
2008-11-09, 01:24 AM
Ah, Pixie Warlocks. Quite possibly one of the most awesome things in DnD.

Especially if you deliver monologues about devouring souls and serving your dark masters in a high, squeaky voice.

True!! They're fun. They're also virtually impossible to kill if you build them the right way. They're native flyers with access to an unlimited source of dispel magic, so meleeing them is dangerous if you're not a native flyer yourself. You can ranged attack them, but they usually outdo you in that category with Eldritch Blast, and are invisible to boot. You can hit them with spells, but the selection is limited because they have an SR three points greater than a same ECL Drow, are genuinely difficult to ranged touch attack, and generally have awesome Will (warlock class) and Reflex (Racial Dexterity bonus) saves.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 01:27 AM
Lol. Love it.

I have to say, Even I (a relative champion of monks) find them underpowered, but I must admit they get the "Suck" claim more than they deserve. All of their skills are useful at some point, (except possibly the level 20 add on.) They're capable of a lot of different things, which, (with the exception of casters) no one in the party can do all of as well. They have a lot of spell like abilities that are on constantly by the end, as opposed to needing to mysteriously have suddenly had it prepared all along.The issue is that they have a relatively undefined role, and attempts to make them fit a role leave them constantly overshadowed. Quite frankly, what can they do well, and why wouldn't someone else be better at it? After all, the Ninja doesn't suck just because it is weak, it sucks because it's weak and it's replaceable by the Rogue. Same with the Samurai. What role can the Monk fill better than anyone else?

Edit:Pixie Warlocks make excellent opponents for an Evil GM.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 01:43 AM
The issue is that they have a relatively undefined role, and attempts to make them fit a role leave them constantly overshadowed. Quite frankly, what can they do well, and why wouldn't someone else be better at it? After all, the Ninja doesn't suck just because it is weak, it sucks because it's weak and it's replaceable by the Rogue. Same with the Samurai. What role can the Monk fill better than anyone else?

Edit:Pixie Warlocks make excellent opponents for an Evil GM.

Oh, I understand that perfectly, and it is part of my point. The Monk fits the RW definition of a jack of all trades pretty well, in that he is better at alot of things than most people are at any but a few of them at once. In a five person party, short of going caster heavy/cheese I'd usually recommend the 5th be a monk, simply to fill in gaps when one person isn't capable etc.

streakster
2008-11-09, 01:47 AM
Oh, I understand that perfectly, and it is part of my point. The Monk fits the RW definition of a jack of all trades pretty well, in that he is better at alot of things than most people are at any but a few of them at once. In a five person party, short of going caster heavy/cheese I'd usually recommend the 5th be a monk, simply to fill in gaps when one person isn't capable etc.

A monk is not equally good at a lot of things. He is equally bad at a lot of things. He cannot straight melee, cannot tank, cannot skillmonkey - what does he have to offer?

You want a fifth wheel? Add in a bard, a binder, a Factotum, a DFA.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 01:52 AM
Oh, I understand that perfectly, and it is part of my point. The Monk fits the RW definition of a jack of all trades pretty well, in that he is better at alot of things than most people are at any but a few of them at once. In a five person party, short of going caster heavy/cheese I'd usually recommend the 5th be a monk, simply to fill in gaps when one person isn't capable etc.See, I'd say a Bard or other Buffer, especially one with an ability to go JoAT as well. Failing that, I'd snag a second Rogueish skillmonkey or an Artificer. The Bard or Artificer makes everyone else more effective. The second skillmonkey can afford to double up on certain skills for Aid Another, take skills the 1st couldn't afford, and complement the other in Melee. The Monk is less effective at those than a second Rogue or a Scout. It lacks the relevant skills, has too few skill points, and is ineffective in melee.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 01:59 AM
A monk is not equally good at a lot of things. He is equally bad at a lot of things. He cannot straight melee, cannot tank, cannot skillmonkey - what does he have to offer?

You want a fifth wheel? Add in a bard, a binder, a Factotum, a DFA.

Ah, but that IS what I said, your simply missing the entirety of the intent of my post, instead focusing on the GAMER definition of Jack of all trades, if even that.

As I said, he is not AS GOOD at any one thing as the person/class that focuses on it. But he doesn't suck at any of them.

He's like the guy in Mystery men who was always 2nd best at anything, related to the person he was facing off against. However, the difference is that he stays second best, so if the 1st best goes away he becomes the Pinch-hitter so to speak.

And no, I don't think he's as good a jack of all trades (at least in the skill points/skills sense) as certain others, but then he also JoaT's in a few ways they don't.

For example, Speaking to a group you've never met when the caster is DOA. Also, scouting with a bard binder or Factotum isn't really likely, though it is with a monk as he's second to the rogue in it, but still has advantages over most other classes.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 02:04 AM
Bard compared to Monk:
Better AC
Same BAB
Better buffing
Better weapon selection
Spellcasting
More skills
More skill points
More splatbook support
Worse saves
Lower HD
More synergy between abilities

How is the Monk a better JoAT?

streakster
2008-11-09, 02:17 AM
Ah, but that IS what I said, your simply missing the entirety of the intent of my post, instead focusing on the GAMER definition of Jack of all trades, if even that.

As I said, he is not AS GOOD at any one thing as the person/class that focuses on it. But he doesn't suck at any of them.

He's like the guy in Mystery men who was always 2nd best at anything, related to the person he was facing off against. However, the difference is that he stays second best, so if the 1st best goes away he becomes the Pinch-hitter so to speak.

And no, I don't think he's as good a jack of all trades (at least in the skill points/skills sense) as certain others, but then he also JoaT's in a few ways they don't.

For example, Speaking to a group you've never met when the caster is DOA. Also, scouting with a bard binder or Factotum isn't really likely, though it is with a monk as he's second to the rogue in it, but still has advantages over most other classes.

Scouting with a Bard: Clairaudience.
Scouting with a Binder: Fly, magic demon bird, fly!
Scouting with a Factotum: I'm good at everything ever. This is a thing. I'm good at it.

Now, as for the rest of your post, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Being bad at everything does not make you a valuable fifth wheel. He can't pinch hit as a tank, a meleer, a scout, trapfinder (well, you can throw him at them. And with his saves, he might live.), and he sure isn't a buffer or spellcaster. What is he pinch hitting as?

Speaking to a group - rilly? If your caster is dead, and you meet some people, and you need to talk to them for some reason instead of just waving and keeping on walking to get the caster rezzed, or killing them and taking their XP's, and no one in the group speaks their language, the character who dumped their CHA because they had nothing else to dump can talk to them?

Monks sure sound necessary now, bow-howdy.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 02:34 AM
Bard compared to Monk:
Better AC
Same BAB
Better buffing
Better weapon selection
Spellcasting
More skills
More skill points
More splatbook support
Worse saves
Lower HD
More synergy between abilities

How is the Monk a better JoAT?


1. I specifically said that in someways might not be as good as others, focusing on skills.

2. Splatbook support tends to be the last thing i focus on in these debates, as the further you move from core the more pointless it becomes to try to keep things strait.

3. :


Bard compared to Monk:
Better AC

Assuming that the bard has enough magic Armor, yes he gets a slight edge due to magic.



Same BAB
With more attacks for Monk once in combat/ more mobility getting INTO combat (though not both at once)



Better buffing

When buffing works. Another fun utility of Monks: Many of their abilities will work when other buffs won't.



Better weapon selection

Arguable, but agreed more out of lack of desire to argue it.



Spellcasting

Monk has a few SLA that emulate spells he might need, but Bard wins this


More skills
More skill points


Already mostly conceded beforehand. Moving on.


More splatbook support

Again, not a big issue for me. Frankly aside from WOTC material splats are hard not to quantify as houseruling anyway. Besides this, monks get a few good bits. Still for what little it is worth, I'll give this to you.


Worse saves

Yep. Monks better there.


Lower HD

Yep. Monk better


More synergy between abilities

And less variety in abilities, less ability to fill sudden holes in party structure. Still, bard does have somewhat more synergy



How is the Monk a better JoAT?

Better secondary scout: Monk
Better at talking to random people when no one has tongues? Monk.
Better as a secondary utility attacker: Arguable, leaning to Monk.
Better Checking for traps without search for traps? Monk by virtue of survivability.
Better in event of AMF in an area? Monk.
Better in event of equiptment loss? Monk


Scouting with a Bard: Clairaudience.
Scouting with a Binder: Fly, magic demon bird, fly!
Scouting with a Factotum: I'm good at everything ever. This is a thing. I'm good at it.


1: YOu sense nothing. "WHat?" You heard me. "How can i sense nothing?" I dont' know. "Well, then I walk in" Crunch. "WHAT?" There was a trap. "I would have known" clearly not.
Monk: Search area. goes in searches "reflex save" passed. "you live."
2: Ah, yes. and it gets shot down/winks out. you lose everything.
3: Factotum: And your party is right next to you when you trigger the alarm by not having sense traps.


Now, as for the rest of your post, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Being bad at everything does not make you a valuable fifth wheel. He can't pinch hit as a tank, a meleer, a scout, trapfinder (well, you can throw him at them. And with his saves, he might live.), and he sure isn't a buffer or spellcaster. What is he pinch hitting as?

All those things. He's a 2nd best at any of them, and thus a good replacement in the event you lose one as opposed to, I don't know, getting your fighter to sweep a room for traps. Or is a fighter better at that now?

He is not worst at everything as it were by being second best at more than one role at once. If you had a fighter fifth wheel and lost a fighter, you'd fill the role but if the rogue died you'd have just lose the role of a rogue, nothing to hold it's place.


Speaking to a group - rilly? If your caster is dead, and you meet some people, and you need to talk to them for some reason instead of just waving and keeping on walking to get the caster rezzed, or killing them and taking their XP's, and no one in the group speaks their language, the character who dumped their CHA because they had nothing else to dump can talk to them?

Even most people siding with you don't think the monk needs all but charisma. They're saying 3 stats. And The most useful monk's I've built focused on only 2. Besides that, even a Cha dumped character can be useful in communicating.

"KIlling them and taking there XP's" Makes me think non combat abilities are meaningless in your games anyway, but to further adress, how do you deal with them trying to take the body, for example? Or see if they know where to get a raise? YOu keep assuming every new NPC exists merely as an enemy.


Monks sure sound necessary now, bow-howdy.

Not necessary, but certainly useful.

Ganurath
2008-11-09, 02:34 AM
Hmm... Level by level comparison of Monk versus Wizard, Cleric, Druid, and Psion, each class competition being in single combat, to evaluate a Monk's capacity in the party role as Anti-Spellcaster might be an interesting analysis.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 02:48 AM
Hmm... Level by level comparison of Monk versus Wizard, Cleric, Druid, and Psion, each class competition being in single combat, to evaluate a Monk's capacity in the party role as Anti-Spellcaster might be an interesting analysis.That's not even fair. A Druid can crush any enemy of equal CR due to actions. A Monk at level 1 will have Will save of +6 assuming he's built for Wis and can afford an 18. Fort saves will be below +4. A 1st level SoD with Spell Focus can have a DC of 17. A Beguiler will boost that to 19. At higher levels the numbers become worse, with the advancement of spells that kill with no Save, no SR.
Better secondary scout: Monk
Better at talking to random people when no one has tongues? Monk.
Better as a secondary utility attacker: Arguable, leaning to Monk.
Better Checking for traps without search for traps? Monk by virtue of survivability.
Better in event of AMF in an area? Monk.
Better in event of equiptment loss? Monk
In order:
Rogue, by 17th level anyone should be able to pull this off, Rogue, Rogue has search, Rogue, has yet to come up for me.

1: YOu sense nothing. "WHat?" You heard me. "How can i sense nothing?" I dont' know. "Well, then I walk in" Crunch. "WHAT?" There was a trap. "I would have known" clearly not.
Monk: Search area. goes in searches passed. "you live."
2: Ah, yes. and it gets shot down/winks out. you lose everything.
3: Factotum: And your party is right next to you when you trigger the alarm by not having sense traps.
1:Monk walks in, gets attacked. Bard casts, finds nothing, warns the party to prepare for combat. Which is better?
2:I send another. The enemy probably needed food. I doubt they can afford to shoot down every swallow that passes overhead.
3:The Factotem does everything. Better than the Rogue. Trap's aren't an issue.
All those things. He's a 2nd best at any of them, and thus a good replacement in the event you lose one as opposed to, I don't know, getting your fighter to sweep a room for traps. Or is a fighter better at that now?

He is not worst at everything as it were by being second best at more than one role at once. If you had a fighter fifth wheel and lost a fighter, you'd fill the role but if the rogue died you'd have just lose the role of a rogue, nothing to hold it's place.That''s why you bring along a second class that is decent at everything(Factotem, Rogue, Bard) to fill in. You don't use a class that stinks at everything to fill in.

streakster
2008-11-09, 02:58 AM
Scouting, silly, not trapfinding.

If you want to talk traps, Bards and Binders have summon spells. Don't press that button - have a monkey do it! Factotums can also look for traps, because they're awesome at search checks and get the rogue's class features if they need them. Monks on the other hand, don't have search. So unless you want them to pinch hit for the Monkey...

If you have a fighter and he dies, you resurrect the fighter. The monk cannot pinch hit for the fighter while you wait - he doesn't have the HD, BAB, AC, or raw damage output. He can't tank or do acceptable melee. He's not second best. He's bad at it. But even if he could, what you're saying is that the monk is handy only when one playable PC is dead, and until this PC is raised. That ain't that handy.

You completely missed the part where I mentioned waving and walking on by, didn't you? "Them taking the body" - who? The new guys? If their stealing the body, we have a problem. A sword-type problem. If its the party, they stuff it in the BoH and get a move on. As for asking them about raising, we don't need to. Either a spellcaster can solve this problem (woops, they're all dead.), or a knowledge check can, or a survival check can, or following any road can, or so on.

Not to mention that you missed the point of that example entirely - its only useful in that one specific situation, and that situation is ridiculously unlikely.

As for "Killin' em and takin' their XP's", I am jocular in all debate threads, because taking them seriously is mind-achingly painful.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 03:02 AM
Rogue, by 17th level anyone should be able to pull this off, Rogue, Rogue has search, Rogue, has yet to come up for me.

So a rogue is better at being a rogue. Wow. Good point.


1:Monk walks in, gets attacked. Bard casts, finds nothing, warns the party to prepare for combat. Which is better?
2:I send another. The enemy probably needed food. I doubt they can afford to shoot down every swallow that passes overhead.

1. Ok, how would the bard know to prepare for combat finding nothing?

2. They shoot it down. Ops, guess they don't like swallows.



3:The Factotem does everything. Better than the Rogue. Trap's aren't an issue. That''s why you bring along a second class that is decent at everything(Factotem, Rogue, Bard) to fill in. You don't use a class that stinks at everything to fill in.

Only Shrodinger's Factotem in this case, otherwise he ends up having notable weak points in compare.


And once again, he doesn't stink at everything. Stinking is when you're bad at something, not "less good". A non hall of fame baseball player doesn't "Stink" by default.

Editing to add streakster's comments now. Please wait while loading.

streakster
2008-11-09, 03:07 AM
2. They shoot it down. Ops, guess they don't like swallows.



Only Shrodinger's Factotem in this case, otherwise he ends up having notable weak points in compare.


And once again, he doesn't stink at everything. Stinking is when you're bad at something, not "less good". A non hall of fame baseball player doesn't "Stink" by default.

So now the enemies hate all birds, in this mythical land where all our casters die for unknown reasons and no one speaks our language, yet it is vital that we communicate with them. Sigh.

The factotum has all skills, huge skill points, the ability to have a huge bonus to any skill, spells, and any class features he wants. If he wants to be good at trapfinding, guess what. He is.

To continue your analogy, let's have each party be a team. The fighter is our star batter. He gets injured and taken off the field. The monk replaces him - and can't hit the pitch.

Second best means that you can't match the challenges the Fighter was supposed to.

Not to mention that Monks aint' even near second best...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 03:13 AM
2. They shoot it down. Oops, guess they don't like swallows.No degree of skill will counter a DM screwing you over. If we're going to resort to that, you might as well admit you're wrong.

Tokiko Mima
2008-11-09, 03:18 AM
Better at talking to random people when no one has tongues? Monk.

Better at talking to people at all levels due to not dumping CHA? :smallcool:
Able to use language abilities at level 4 instead of level 17? :smallcool:

If you're using a Monk as a face character simply because they can speak any language, you're kinda scraping the bottom of the barrel. Tongues is not exactly a difficult spell to acquire.

Talic
2008-11-09, 03:23 AM
Ok, I'm now told that a monk is better at skillmonkeying than the best skillmonkey PRC in the game?

Let's clear the air.

Scondary scout. Secondary fighter.

The monk is second best at scouting, so long as we assume an area is only lightly trapped, and only provides damage. For example... What if the trap is an Alarm spell. Monk can't possibly detect it, and guess what? Now everything that was supposed to be warned, has been. And that's just level 1 magic and core.

The monk is second best at fighting, so long as he isn't targeted. And in reality, it's more likely he's tertiary at fighting. Between the offensive ability of the druid, the cleric, and the rogue, it's real easy for the monk to not match up.

Monk is great as a Gestalt add-on-pack. It shores up weaknesses in saves, confers useful immunities. But that's all it is. Monk does not have the real damage potential. It's good to shore up weaknesses, but it doesn't really have strengths.

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 03:25 AM
Scouting, silly, not trapfinding.


Tis part of scouting. Another example would be the fact a monk can simply actually SEE something (with higher disbelief saves) from farther off/by moving way from the party quicker.


If you want to talk traps, Bards and Binders have summon spells. Don't press that button - have a monkey do it! Factotums can also look for traps, because they're awesome at search checks and get the rogue's class features if they need them. Monks on the other hand, don't have search. So unless you want them to pinch hit for the Monkey...

Bards and Binders: Yea, kind've goes back to the issue of casters doing everything anyway, but there you are. Besides that, your assuming the trap would get the monkey and a human. What if the trap is weight triggered? Sound? etcetera?

Factotums again, don't get away from the Schrodinger rule entirely. They can only fill certain aspects to certain degrees. They have to take feats etc to go further.




If you have a fighter and he dies, you resurrect the fighter. The monk cannot pinch hit for the fighter while you wait - he doesn't have the HD, BAB, AC, or raw damage output. He can't tank or do acceptable melee. He's not second best. He's bad at it. But even if he could, what you're saying is that the monk is handy only when one playable PC is dead, and until this PC is raised. That ain't that handy.


Sure he has the raw damage output, HD AC and BAB to fill in for a figher until you get where you need to go. Just not to do it to the same degree as the figher. again Andrew Carnegie isn't a poor wretch in need of directions to a soup kitchen simply because he's second richest in history next to John D. Rockefeller.

And again, I'm giving a function the monk has. You guys kept saying he didn't have any.


You completely missed the part where I mentioned waving and walking on by, didn't you? "Them taking the body" - who? The new guys? If their stealing the body, we have a problem. A sword-type problem. If its the party, they stuff it in the BoH and get a move on. As for asking them about raising, we don't need to. Either a spellcaster can solve this problem (woops, they're all dead.), or a knowledge check can, or a survival check can, or following any road can, or so on.

Oh, yes, because every city is going to have a willing Cleric. And your cleric is mysteriously capable of raising himself. If they're stealing the body, can you be sure you can beat them? All of them? Isn't there a risk of rot if you keep moving with the body too long? HOw would a survival check take you to a cleric, by finding a city? Again, you seem to think clerics have no personality, and the world only exists for the PC's.





Not to mention that you missed the point of that example entirely - its only useful in that one specific situation, and that situation is ridiculously unlikely.

Only if your DM is lazy. Furthermore the simple fact is that this was an example. Want another? Who's more use in combat in a large AMF, Bard or Monk?




As for "Killin' em and takin' their XP's", I am jocular in all debate threads, because taking them seriously is mind-achingly painful.

Fair point. I've probably just been reading too much Dork tower/KotDT)


So now the enemies hate all birds, in this mythical land where all our casters die for unknown reasons and no one speaks our language, yet it is vital that we communicate with them. Sigh.

The factotum has all skills, huge skill points, the ability to have a huge bonus to any skill, spells, and any class features he wants. If he wants to be good at trapfinding, guess what. He is.

To continue your analogy, let's have each party be a team. The fighter is our star batter. He gets injured and taken off the field. The monk replaces him - and can't hit the pitch.

Second best means that you can't match the challenges the Fighter was supposed to.

Not to mention that Monks aint' even near second best...

Nope. He hits the pitch. A single instead of a triple. But he hits.
H'es second best at several things at once.



No degree of skill will counter a DM screwing you over. If we're going to resort to that, you might as well admit you're wrong.

Or it means that the setting is simply such that certain (franky obvious to anyone in the game world) tricks would not work as well.


Better at talking to people at all levels due to not dumping CHA? :smallcool:
Able to use language abilities at level 4 instead of level 17? :smallcool:

If you're using a Monk as a face character simply because they can speak any language, you're kinda scraping the bottom of the barrel. Tongues is not exactly a difficult spell to acquire.

I never said make him the face. Not all social interaction is about persuasion to the degree your talking. Even a CHa 3 character could probably get peole to point him to the nearest helpful cleric if they didn't see him as a threat. And I deliberately covered the fact a monk doesn't HAVE to dump cha (it is merely the one of many stats he can most safely dump)

Besides that, again, you think that anyone who doesn't' understand you MUST require a diplomacy check. If the ether party would be willing to help and he is asking a question, the odds he does so bad they are no longer willing isn't high.

And again, I specifically said ToSaM made a good SUBSTITUTE for Tongues, in the event it wasn't available, not that it was better. Ease of use is not the issue.



Also, to all, please understand that as your all responding to my posts it may take tome for me to respond to you. For example Talics post will now either have to wait or be added in.



The monk is second best at scouting, so long as we assume an area is only lightly trapped, and only provides damage. For example... What if the trap is an Alarm spell. Monk can't possibly detect it, and guess what? Now everything that was supposed to be warned, has been. And that's just level 1 magic and core.

Ah, but the rest of your party isn't right next door. Guess your party isnt' as screwed as if they'd waltzed in ont her own. Hmmm....



The monk is second best at fighting, so long as he isn't targeted. And in reality, it's more likely he's tertiary at fighting. Between the offensive ability of the druid, the cleric, and the rogue, it's real easy for the monk to not match up.
again, I specifically excluded Casters because they can be made better at anything and I've always conceded that.

As to rogue, when replacing a fighter he's probably not as good, as many of his more useful combat abilities go away when staying in a fight. as to not being targeted, again he's not extraordinarily low on HP and has good saves and even a Decent AC in most cases, if a bit lower than the heavily armored fighter.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-09, 03:29 AM
I'm out. We've listed ways in which other classes can do anything better than a Monk. We've shown that there is nothing a Monk can do that a Rogue cannot do better. And yet you persist in claiming that a Monk is more beneficial to a party than another class. You refuse to be convinced, so I'm out.

Talic
2008-11-09, 03:31 AM
Sure he has the raw damage output, HD AC and BAB to fill in for a figher until you get where you need to go. Just not to do it to the same degree as the figher. again Andrew Carnegie isn't a poor wretch in need of directions to a soup kitchen simply because he's second richest in history next to John D. Rockefeller.

No on damage, due to reliance on high int to get those skills to be the scout, wis and dex for the AC. BAB is on par with the rogue, though the rogue will usually get better damage.

So while Carnegie isn't going to a soup kitchen, you have your roles mixed up.

Rockefeller - Druid
Carnegie - Fighter
Joe the Plumber - Monk

turkishproverb
2008-11-09, 03:35 AM
I'm out. We've listed ways in which other classes can do anything better than a Monk. We've shown that there is nothing a Monk can do that a Rogue cannot do better. And yet you persist in claiming that a Monk is more beneficial to a party than another class. You refuse to be convinced, so I'm out.

Monk moves faster and understands more. :smallwink:

Yea, frankly I'm leaving as well. Talic's last post pretty well showed that I'm completely being misinterpreted/misrepresented in this thread, kind've funny since I started by clarifying one post I made.


No on damage, due to reliance on high int to get those skills to be the scout, wis and dex for the AC. BAB is on par with the rogue, though the rogue will usually get better damage.

So while Carnegie isn't going to a soup kitchen, you have your roles mixed up.

Rockefeller - Druid
Carnegie - Fighter
Joe the Plumber - Monk


Or he's just able to see things before the rest of the party and scout that way, and can use high wis to at least get basics on the area ahead, rather than walking into the situation without looking.


And he'd have enough damage to put down/help fight threats they had to face immediately, esp given that we're not only talking about unarmed strike here. Heck, since it isn't all about damage, here's one: Gloves+ poison.

And no, frankly monk is not the plumber, as he's in a fairly good place with many roles, but not best in any.

EDIT: For the record: I've made it clear I think the monk is underpowered (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93103)

monty
2008-11-09, 03:57 AM
Only Shrodinger's Factotem in this case, otherwise he ends up having notable weak points in compare.

A good Factotum only really needs Int thanks to Cunning X, especially out of combat where inspiration isn't a limiting factor.

Also, you are aware that a Factotum has trapfinding as a class feature, right? Not to mention they can buff their saves if they somehow don't find a trap. Also, they get Int to most relevant skills, can get Tongues through Arcane Dilettante...did I miss anything? I don't see how you can possibly claim that Monk is a better secondary scout.

Kurald Galain
2008-11-09, 04:22 AM
Sure he has the raw damage output, HD AC and BAB to fill in for a figher until you get where you need to go.

Proof by assertion isn't.

monty
2008-11-09, 04:23 AM
Factotum: I'm good at everything ever. This is a thing. I'm good at it.

Can I sig that?

Bayar
2008-11-09, 04:34 AM
So, you found out what a monk can do well. He can substitute the summoned monster ! Why burn a spell slot to summon a creature for the sole purpose to trigger traps when you can send good old out-of-synch monk ? With his skills maxed out on spot/listen/search and taking feats that boost his saves and HP, he can be a veritable trap finder ! He puts his body on the line for the good of the party !

And the party lets him because he is expendable and still sucks too much to even be core ! (4th edition anyone ?)

Talic
2008-11-09, 05:13 AM
Ah, but the rest of your party isn't right next door. Guess your party isnt' as screwed as if they'd waltzed in ont her own. Hmmm....Incorrect. If the party had a rogue, rather than the monk, the trap would be detected and bypassed. In the monk situation, you now have an aware enemy. As an enemy that places an alarm generally has a plan for dealing with unknown intruders. This will usually NOT be come in charging. It will generally be "alert others and fortify". Now the advantage of surprise is lost, and the party must engage an aware foe, on home ground. Welcome to Tucker's Kobolds. On the Menu: We're serving PC's.


again, I specifically excluded Casters because they can be made better at anything and I've always conceded that.The sad thing is? The druid would be better without a single spell.

As to rogue, when replacing a fighter he's probably not as good, as many of his more useful combat abilities go away when staying in a fight. as to not being targeted, again he's not extraordinarily low on HP and has good saves and even a Decent AC in most cases, if a bit lower than the heavily armored fighter.
The rogue will not fill in for the fighter. Generally, the cleric does a better job. Or the druid. The rogue will deal better damage than a monk, at more advantageous ranges, with comparable AC. Saves won't be quite as strong, but the HP can probably be offset by the fact that a rogue can deal good damage with an 8 str. That leaves int, dex, and con. With better skill points than the monk, a rogue can have an int 4 lower and even out. So now, we can take an int 14, dex 18, con 14, and there's 28 points, a solid AC, attack bonus, damage, skills.

To match skills, the monk would need an 18 int. Even then, it's missing trap finding.
To match HP, the average difference in die rolls is 1hp/level. So the monk could get by with a 12. To match AC if the rogue is in a chain shirt? We're looking at 18 dex, 18 wis. This will even out the attack bonus as well, with weapon finesse.

So to even out basic combat stats, and just take rogue bonus dice vs monk increased unarmed damage, a 28 point rogue would be matched by a 52 point monk. (18 int, 18 dex, 18 wis, 12 con). Monk will have a slight edge in fort saves, and a more pronounced edge in will. But straight up, filling the fighter role toe to toe? That's the comparison.

lord_khaine
2008-11-09, 05:26 AM
If you would like to build a Monk better, using only one flaw and 28PB, be my guest. I was trying to stay mostly core for simplicity.

And Natural Bond works that way just fine.

If it actualy work that way, and i cant say so since i dont have the relevant book, then im still pretty sure its only because of a design mistake.

since the discussion have moved on, then i wont make the monk, but i can say i would have replaced wis with str, replaced the amulet with a gauntlet and spend the spare cash i got from that on a pearl of power and a stack of potions of enlarge and mage armor.


To continue your analogy, let's have each party be a team. The fighter is our star batter. He gets injured and taken off the field. The monk replaces him - and can't hit the pitch

that would be because you had taken a monk player from a wrong league, if you build the monk proberly he can and will hit things.


The monk is second best at fighting, so long as he isn't targeted. And in reality, it's more likely he's tertiary at fighting. Between the offensive ability of the druid, the cleric, and the rogue, it's real easy for the monk to not match up.

and 2 out of 3 of those are full casters, so im not really sure it says anything at all.


And again, I specifically said ToSaM made a good SUBSTITUTE for Tongues, in the event it wasn't available, not that it was better. Ease of use is not the issue.

i would actualy say its better than tongues, since you dont have to cast it first, and its allways prepared.


I'm out. We've listed ways in which other classes can do anything better than a Monk. We've shown that there is nothing a Monk can do that a Rogue cannot do better. And yet you persist in claiming that a Monk is more beneficial to a party than another class. You refuse to be convinced, so I'm out.


i know how you feel, i have made countless posts in these discussion, but i felt like hammering my head against a wall, since mostly the only think people actualy remember from those thread is that they are suposed to laugh at the idea of ½ charget wands.


Proof by assertion isn't.

that goes both ways.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-09, 05:34 AM
By level 17 the whole party could have permanent tongues without any difficulty. You gate in an Effertie, wish up 3 Rings of 3 Wish's, have the wizard cast Tongues on your, and then use the ring to replicate permanency (it provides up to 5K XP). To be honest, the whole party should really have most of the spells that can be made permanent, permanent by level 17 or so.

Talic
2008-11-09, 05:46 AM
i would actualy say its better than tongues, since you dont have to cast it first, and its allways prepared.But worse than a level 4 spell slot, which can prepare and cast any number of spells. Fact is, any monk ability can be replicated by any of a number of spells. Slow fall? Feather fall. Immunity to disease/poison? Easy. Tongues? Hmm. Flurry/fast movement? Haste. The list goes on. Basically, the monk is a warrior with worse feats and a few constant spells... That he can't even choose.


i know how you feel, i have made countless posts in these discussion, but i felt like hammering my head against a wall, since mostly the only think people actualy remember from those thread is that they are suposed to laugh at the idea of ½ charget wands.

No, I remember, "monks are mechanically sub par, no matter how much their protagonists argue otherwise".

lord_khaine
2008-11-09, 06:47 AM
But worse than a level 4 spell slot, which can prepare and cast any number of spells. Fact is, any monk ability can be replicated by any of a number of spells. Slow fall? Feather fall. Immunity to disease/poison? Easy. Tongues? Hmm. Flurry/fast movement? Haste. The list goes on. Basically, the monk is a warrior with worse feats and a few constant spells... That he can't even choose.

this doesnt really say anything, since i will bet you would be hard pressed to find any kind of ability that could not be replaced by either a spell or a power.


No, I remember, "monks are mechanically sub par, no matter how much their protagonists argue otherwise

and i remember it as "i will just continue to claim monks are sub par, while ignoring or twisting everything the protagonists are saying."

Mephit
2008-11-09, 06:55 AM
that would be because you had taken a monk player from a wrong league, if you build the monk proberly he can and will hit things.

I'm pretty sure that when we have a party built by a group of people of the same level of minmaxing/munchkinery, and we give them encounters that actually challenge these PCs, the monk still won't be a viable substitute for a fighter.

Talic
2008-11-09, 07:04 AM
How about the halfling rogue racial substitution ability for level 10, which lessens the penalty for sniping from -20 to -10.

Robilar's Gambit.

Frenzied berzerker's supreme power attack.

As for the claim. At high levels of optimization, you will not be able to make a monk that can get damage outputs even coming close to approaching what an optimized ubercharger does.

You will not get the AC of a dedicated optimized AC tank.

You will not get the skill versatility of an optimized skillmonkey, as you have less skill points and less class ability synergy.

We really don't need to rehash the same tired arguments, again and again, and again. It will save a lot of time if you go ahead and concede the three points above, or do the following:

Build a monk-based build that can do over 500 damage, without crits, in a single round, at ECL 13.

Build a Monk that has an AC higher than 50 at ECL 10.

Build an ECL 13 monk that has a chance to detect and disable a trap with a search DC of 30.

For all of these, limit yourself to the monk class, and monk themed PRC's.

ZerglingOne
2008-11-09, 07:08 AM
I have always had monks that I play fulfill a very special role. They're fantastic at controlling how an enemy will act. What I mean is that since a monk is hands down faster than pretty much anything, you can force enemies to prepare against a charge through retreat, tumble, charge tactics. When you force enemies to prepare against a charge, they become vulnerable to spellcasting, they are unable to move, and if they don't prepare, they get a 3x hit delivered directly to their face, likely with movement left to prevent a full attack from the opponent on the next turn. For this, monks are great, but otherwise they're not exactly the best class. Monks are also very good grapplers and sunderers because they can't ever drop their +3 adamantine fists. They also have the best saving throws of any class, hands down.

Edit: Barring any unforseen extra-planar movement, they're also extremely good at giving chase even when their opponents are mounted.

Edit2: And whoever said they don't make good skill monkeys, consider that they have absolutely no armor check penalty to overcome.

Eldariel
2008-11-09, 07:13 AM
How about the halfling rogue racial substitution ability for level 10, which lessens the penalty for sniping from -20 to -10.

Robilar's Gambit.

Frenzied berzerker's supreme power attack.

Or in general, feats. Improved Trip, Stand Still, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Greater Manyshot, Flyby Attack, etc. All of them give abilities you either plain can't do with spells, or that do things better than spells (e.g. Combat Reflexes and Stand Still stop opponents' movement without spending actions, Flyby Attack allows you to move twice with essentially a single move action, Power Attack effectively makes every buff spell add more extra damage, etc.).

ZerglingOne: http://nymeria87.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/facepalm1.jpg

Kurald Galain
2008-11-09, 07:14 AM
When you force enemies to prepare against a charge, they become vulnerable to spellcasting, they are unable to move, and if they don't prepare, they get a 3x hit delivered directly to their face,
Wait, how's that? You're saying that it's somehow a good tactic for all the enemies ready an action against the monk charging? Probably the best tactic for the enemies is to ignore the monk, and deal with the PCs that are actual threats.


Edit2: And whoever said they don't make good skill monkeys, consider that they have absolutely no armor check penalty to overcome.
Neither does any other skillmonkey.


Monks are also very good grapplers and sunderers because they can't ever drop their +3 adamantine fists.
Unfortunately, both grappling and sundering are poor tactics to begin with. Also, to grapple well, you really need a strength focus and a high BAB. Yes, the one tactic that the monk excels at is running away, but the problem is that running away does not win fights.

Talic
2008-11-09, 07:19 AM
Next: The level 15 monk grapples the Colossal monstrous Scorpion!

Followup: He Sunders the Tyrannosaur!

Occasional Sage
2008-11-09, 08:20 AM
*snip*
Monks are also very good grapplers and sunderers because they can't ever drop their +3 adamantine fists. They also have the best saving throws of any class, hands down.


Doesn't Sunder require slashing damage, and aren't monks' unarmed attacks bludgeoning?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-11-09, 08:23 AM
Doesn't Sunder require slashing damage, and aren't monks' unarmed attacks bludgeoning?

Both slashing and bludgeoning will suffice.

Kurald Galain
2008-11-09, 08:32 AM
Doesn't Sunder require slashing damage, and aren't monks' unarmed attacks bludgeoning?

No, slashing or bludgeoning.

However, that sunder trick only works from level 16 and up, whereas a weapon-using melee class can sunder as soon as he can afford an adamantine weapon, which would be level 5. And do a better job at it because of better BAB and better strength bonus. And regardless of all of that, if you sunder things that means less loot for you, and try explaining that to the rest of the party. Hint: if you want to rid the enemy of their weapons or tools, ask the party rogue to steal them.

So, another monk myth firmly disproven.

lord_khaine
2008-11-09, 08:34 AM
By level 17 the whole party could have permanent tongues without any difficulty. You gate in an Effertie, wish up 3 Rings of 3 Wish's, have the wizard cast Tongues on your, and then use the ring to replicate permanency (it provides up to 5K XP). To be honest, the whole party should really have most of the spells that can be made permanent, permanent by level 17 or so.
oh yes, no situation is so bad that it cant be solved by gate abuse...


I'm pretty sure that when we have a party built by a group of people of the same level of minmaxing/munchkinery, and we give them encounters that actually challenge these PCs, the monk still won't be a viable substitute for a fighter
ah yes, this is really a tough claim, since we dont have a universal scale of minmaxing, so i guess all i can do is to say that i think he would, and then leave it at that.


How about the halfling rogue racial substitution ability for level 10, which lessens the penalty for sniping from -20 to -10.

Robilar's Gambit.

Frenzied berzerker's supreme power attack.

well Robilar's gambit is nice enough, and i wont even bother commenting on Supreme power attack, since it means you would be forced to have the suckiest prestice class of them all along with you in the party.


We really don't need to rehash the same tired arguments, again and again, and again. It will save a lot of time if you go ahead and concede the three points above, or do the following:

Build a monk-based build that can do over 500 damage, without crits, in a single round, at ECL 13.

Build a Monk that has an AC higher than 50 at ECL 10.

Build an ECL 13 monk that has a chance to detect and disable a trap with a search DC of 30.

For all of these, limit yourself to the monk class, and monk themed PRC's.
ahh yes, personaly i think those points just show what happens when you pile on enough splatbooks, but i will give you those 3 points, if you can manage to build a Core fighter who can do that.


Unfortunately, both grappling and sundering are poor tactics to begin with. Also, to grapple well, you really need a strength focus and a high BAB. Yes, the one tactic that the monk excels at is running away, but the problem is that running away does not win fights

having full BAB is really very overrated, in most games it wont be more than a +2/3 difference, and thats compensatet by having more grapple attacks.

edit.

So, another monk myth firmly disproven
more the myth that its actualy worth sundering at all.

Flashlight
2008-11-09, 09:04 AM
Next: The level 15 monk grapples the Colossal monstrous Scorpion!

Followup: He Sunders the Tyrannosaur!

You win, can I sig that?

Bayar
2008-11-09, 09:06 AM
ahh yes, personaly i think those points just show what happens when you pile on enough splatbooks, but i will give you those 3 points, if you can manage to build a Core fighter who can do that.

The first one is kinda easy, the second one...plausible (bot not much), the third one...WHO THE **** USES A FIGHTER TO DETECT AND DISARM TRAPS ?!?


having full BAB is really very overrated, in most games it wont be more than a +2/3 difference, and thats compensatet by having more grapple attacks.


So, not having 4 attacks per full attack at level 16 and not be able to power attack the **** out of people is over rated...





Think that I will leave this thread. It is starting to smell from all that fail taint.

I also wonder why the mods havent locked it yet since it is a veritable ticking flame bomb.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-09, 09:13 AM
No on damage, due to reliance on high int to get those skills to be the scout, wis and dex for the AC. BAB is on par with the rogue, though the rogue will usually get better damage.

So while Carnegie isn't going to a soup kitchen, you have your roles mixed up.

Rockefeller - Druid
Carnegie - Fighter
Joe the Plumber - Monk

Whoa, Monk is not that good. He has less Cha. Did you see how much people were talking about Joe (Low Cha means they disregard your presence).

Kurald Galain
2008-11-09, 09:44 AM
ahh yes, personaly i think those points just show what happens when you pile on enough splatbooks, but i will give you those 3 points, if you can manage to build a Core fighter who can do that.
You are aware, I hope, that the fighter is the second weakest class in the player's handbook? Saying "the monk is nearly as good as the fighter" is really not a compliment.


more the myth that its actualy worth sundering at all.
True enough, but I'm not the one that brought up that "monks are so great because they can sunder stuff".

Tengu_temp
2008-11-09, 09:47 AM
You are aware, I hope, that the fighter is the second weakest class in the player's handbook?

I'd say third - rangers are worse. Unless you get access to some splats that give them decent spells, but then we're not in core territory anymore.

Ghill
2008-11-09, 10:21 AM
I should have put up a chair when I first read this YESTERDAY.

Anyway, it seems that the Monk requires a large amount of specialized build to be effective. If you play an Elven Monk from level one and you take Weapon Finesse, which allows you to focus on Dex, Con, and Wis.

Assuming you get two great scores, you can have an AC, To Hit, and Hit Point bonus. This is a great Monk build, unfortunately it is still not a great character...

In short, because they should have the Fighter BAB advancement. If they did they would be a effective class.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-09, 10:25 AM
I should have put up a chair when I first read this YESTERDAY.

Anyway, it seems that the Monk requires a large amount of specialized build to be effective. If you play an Elven Monk from level one and you take Weapon Finesse, which allows you to focus on Dex, Con, and Wis.

Assuming you get two great scores, you can have an AC, To Hit, and Hit Point bonus. This is a great Monk build, unfortunately it is still not a great character...

In short, because they should have the Fighter BAB advancement. If they did they would be a effective class.

I would say they would be better. They still have the issue that their abilities have no synergy.
But they would be better than the Fighter.

lord_khaine
2008-11-09, 11:35 AM
You are aware, I hope, that the fighter is the second weakest class in the player's handbook? Saying "the monk is nearly as good as the fighter" is really not a compliment.


but the only thing i have agreed on is that the monk is weaker that full casters, or for that matter ToB chars.


So, not having 4 attacks per full attack at level 16 and not be able to power attack the **** out of people is over rated...

at lv 16 (a level im pretty sure most chars dont reach) its has a +4 to hit, and a 4th attack that rarely hits over a medium bab.


Think that I will leave this thread. It is starting to smell from all that fail taint.

I also wonder why the mods havent locked it yet since it is a veritable ticking flame bomb.
goodbye, you wont be missed.

afroakuma
2008-11-09, 11:42 AM
goodbye, you wont be missed.

Unneccessary, lord_khaine.

If this debate is going to occur, can both sides stick to reasonable proofs and cited opinions, instead of half-page quote gainsaying?

Most of you are doing so, and there have been good postings on both sides, but for those few who are not: you know who you are, and you are weakening your arguments by doing so.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-09, 11:42 AM
I should have put up a chair when I first read this YESTERDAY.

Anyway, it seems that the Monk requires a large amount of specialized build to be effective. If you play an Elven Monk from level one and you take Weapon Finesse, which allows you to focus on Dex, Con, and Wis.

Assuming you get two great scores, you can have an AC, To Hit, and Hit Point bonus. This is a great Monk build, unfortunately it is still not a great character...

In short, because they should have the Fighter BAB advancement. If they did they would be a effective class.

Grey Elf Monk Focusing on Dex and Int with the feats Faerie Mysteries Initiate (Int to HP instead of Con), Kung Fu Genius (All monk abilities that reference Wis now work off Int), Keen Intellect (Int instead of Wisdom to Will saves), Weapon Finesse, Martial Study: Shadow Blade Technique, Martial Stance: Child of Shadow, Shadow Blade, Snack Kick, and Improved Natural Attack.

So for the low, low investment of 9 feats you can get an ok Monk without MAD that can actually deal a reasonable amount of damage. Which means with 2 flaws you become alright at level 20 unless you Chaos Shuffle, in which case you can be viable at level 6.

Yukitsu
2008-11-09, 11:56 AM
Which is still IMO half as good as the equivalent swordsage build.

streakster
2008-11-09, 11:56 AM
Snack Kick

Dorito Punch! Cheeto Throw! Twinky Chop!

Sorry, I found this funny, is all.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-09, 11:57 AM
Which is still IMO half as good as the equivalent swordsage build.

Half? Try 20% (maybe).

EDIT: Although with working off Int you can actually be a viable secondary skill monkey and scout (you now have the skill points). And if you max tumble, and take expeditious dodge, mobility (sucks not being able to get this from armor), and spring attack you can even be useful in battle. Thanks to Snap Kick you practically double your damage from a standard attack and with the monks speed boost you can use spring attack to stay out of range of your target, tumble let's you deny then their AoO's.

Yukitsu
2008-11-09, 11:59 AM
What can I say? I'm generous. :smallbiggrin:

You'd need to take the cobra strikes variant. I'm not really sures I like that one, because it negates flurry of blows, which was one of the points of optimizing per hit damage in the first place.

streakster
2008-11-09, 12:12 PM
<snip>
Bards and Binders: Yea, kind've goes back to the issue of casters doing everything anyway, but there you are. Besides that, your assuming the trap would get the monkey and a human. What if the trap is weight triggered? Sound? etcetera?
<snip>
Oh, yes, because every city is going to have a willing Cleric. And your cleric is mysteriously capable of raising himself. If they're stealing the body, can you be sure you can beat them? All of them? Isn't there a risk of rot if you keep moving with the body too long? HOw would a survival check take you to a cleric, by finding a city? Again, you seem to think clerics have no personality, and the world only exists for the PC's.



I know he left. I merely felt that this had to be addressed.

1. Of course I am assuming the trap would get the monkey and the human. If it doesn't trigger for a monkey or a human, it's not a threat to me. And if the trap is set off by weight or sound, my monkey will set it off.

2. I never claimed every city would. That's silly. But if the city has no clerics (they're out randomly smiting birds, I suppose), I can still find the next city. Just by picking the biggest road and moving along, actually. That's assuming, by the way, that no one in the entire new city speaks any language I am aware of. Hopefully there exists one willing cleric or one person who speaks the same language as the party in this entire setting, though I wouldn't bet on it. Look at the way everyone hates birds, after all. This place is freaky.

I have no idea what you mean by our cleric raising himself - did he take contingency? Are the magic spirits of the birds returning to raise him in vengance?

If they're stealing it, then they're bad guys. Talking to them would not have been helpful. Mr. Sword would be helpful. If we can't beat them, it's a TPK, and talking to an organization of evil people that are vastly stronger than we are would have been silly.

Funnily enough, resurrection doesn't care about rot.

I never claimed or thought that, silly. Regardless of a cleric's personality, fat sacks of cash will probably convince him to throw down a rez for us. If it won't, gut him, and present his corpse to a cleric of the other guy. See if you can get a rez as a reward.

Mushroom Ninja
2008-11-09, 12:17 PM
Wow, I'm sick for just one day, and I come back to see that an 8 page monk thread has sprung up. :smallbiggrin:

Monk can actually be a pretty decent class as a 1 or 2 level dip. For example, a Druid 19/ Monk 1 would be pretty hilarious.

Flickerdart
2008-11-09, 01:00 PM
If it won't, gut him, and present his corpse to a cleric of the other guy. See if you can get a rez as a reward.
If there are no "clerics of the other guy", keep gutting them and showing the corpses to the next Cleric. Eventually, one of them will get the picture and give you that rez.

Yukitsu
2008-11-09, 01:05 PM
If there are no "clerics of the other guy", keep gutting them and showing the corpses to the next Cleric. Eventually, one of them will get the picture and give you that rez.

If that doesn't work, smite the DM with a folding chair, because his world is suck.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-09, 01:19 PM
I have no idea what you mean by our cleric raising himself - did he take contingency?


Actually, there are a multitude if spells making you get raised if die.

ReRaise isn't just a FF Tactics spell:
example Death Pact Cleric 8.
Or cast Delay death on yourself: I'm sure someone can use a couple potions on you when you reach -100 (just need a lot).

Flickerdart
2008-11-09, 01:34 PM
If that doesn't work, smite the DM with a folding chair, because his world is suck.
Besides, I'm sure you can always get band-aiding from Clerics of Nature deities or Druids, who must be outraged from the random bird killing that goes on in the world.

cenghiz
2008-11-09, 01:46 PM
So... Where's Giacomo?

Anyway.. I'm no D&D expert. I haven't even played for years, but I am sure of a few things.

1. FUN =/= Impossibility.. If the DM is making things impossible for you, he's not doing a good job. He's making his own game less enjoyable. We, players, love to play the winners, not the 194th party that failed to retrieve the Sun Orb.
If in a game the DM said "OMG wizard is dead and people are coming to steal his corpse and they don't speak any of the bonus languages you took for your rogue and OMG OMG they're invincible you can't kill them." I would punch the DM... hard... below the belt.
All right.. I wouldn't punch him.. But I would possibly leave.

If the DM said "They killed the fourth bird you sent in for spying. They hate birds.." I'd declare that they're out of arrows ages ago. Birds do fly. If they're hunting all, they won't retrieve all their arrows back. Some break, some get lost and they must eventually be out of arrows. If the DM says "No, they're only shooting the birds you sent." I would kick him, in the shin.

2. In D&D, party is the keyword. You need to aid the party. Saying "I'll be useful when X, Y or Z dies.." is the same as saying "I'll play Diablo over here till my turn comes.". One has to contribute all the time. I don't care if the monk is the second best scout/tank/damage dealer/skillmonkey/sensual massage expert or not. I'd rather be in a lacking party till our comrade is resurrected and have another person who describes his exciting martial manuevvers, the sweat pouring down his cheeks as he touches the trigger or the strange hand gestures he makes as he prepares for that stinking cloud, instead of someone waiting "Err, I'll shine when he dies." There are NPCs for those roles.

I don't know how much has changed since the times I actually played D&D, but I'm positive monks suck.

Starbuck_II
2008-11-09, 01:51 PM
So... Where's Giacomo?

Anyway.. I'm no D&D expert. I haven't even played for years, but I am sure of a few things.

I don't know how much has changed since the times I actually played D&D, but I'm positive monks suck.
They were better in 2E I thought. They synergized better (granted everyone could full attack and move).



If the DM said "They killed the fourth bird you sent in for spying. They hate birds.." I'd declare that they're out of arrows ages ago. Birds do fly. If they're hunting all, they won't retrieve all their arrows back. Some break, some get lost and they must eventually be out of arrows. If the DM says "No, they're only shooting the birds you sent." I would kick him, in the shin.

I'm surprised a druid group hasn't come along and killed them. Those are nature's beasts!

Talya
2008-11-09, 02:21 PM
Flaws in the monk:

- Worst MAD of any class. In order to keep up with a fighter (not exactly a strong class to start with) with 4 dump stats, a monk needs to keep strength, dexterity, constitution, and wisdom high.
- Lack of synergy in class features. Hell, some of them are mutually exclusive (fast movement and flurry, anyone?)
- Lack of ability to hit. Medium BAB, inability to enchant their fists/body, and loss of equipment slots kill them.
- Lack of skills. Monks have a good set of class skills that are useful to them, but no skill points to work with. They only get 4 per level, and usually are forced to dump Int due to the aforementioned MAD.
- Low armor class and hit points for a front-line combatant, which is really their only job.

Note that some of those flaws compound each other, so judiciously fixing 2 or 3 of them likely fixes the entire class. For instance, boosting their hit die to a d12 (completely reasonable considering many martial artists go through more endurance and physical punishment training than you can imagine) eliminates a portion of the MAD issue a small bit by reducing the need to pump constitution way high.

Eldariel
2008-11-09, 04:21 PM
Lack of Skills is also compounded by lack of Trapfinding. They'd be fine scouts if they could locate traps. As things stand, they're certain to alert the enemy of your presence and likely to die since they have no means of locating traps, let alone dealing with them. If the Rogue dies, the Monk is not going scouting lest he gets rid of his life too (although death may be a blessing were you forced to be a Monk).

horngeek
2008-11-09, 04:33 PM
From what I have heard about the monk, it is good at doing one thing-
roleplaying.

Eldariel
2008-11-09, 04:34 PM
From what I have heard about the monk, it is good at doing one thing-
roleplaying.

...since when has your class impacted how good roleplaying the players perform? I mean, it's not the class that does the roleplaying, it's the player. A Fighter could easily be roleplayed as a Monk. A Cleric too. And Unarmed Swordsage even more easily.

streakster
2008-11-09, 04:36 PM
...since when has your class impacted how good roleplaying the players perform? I mean, it's not the class that does the roleplaying, it's the player. A Fighter could easily be roleplayed as a Monk. A Cleric too. And Unarmed Swordsage even more easily.

Not to mention that a Monk carries the disadvantage of having to explain just how the heck he learned to talk to squirrels.

Bayar
2008-11-09, 04:40 PM
Not to mention that a Monk carries the disadvantage of having to explain just how the heck he learned to talk to squirrels.

Or how his mouth and voice are not really sychronised.

BRC
2008-11-09, 04:42 PM
...since when has your class impacted how good roleplaying the players perform? I mean, it's not the class that does the roleplaying, it's the player. A Fighter could easily be roleplayed as a Monk. A Cleric too. And Unarmed Swordsage even more easily.
Personally, I consider most Monks, as in members of a monastic order, to be Cloistered Clerics, Clerics, Adepts, or Archivists, especially for a monk of a good deity.
"Welcome Brother, I'm glad you've decided to join our monestary and devote your life to Pelor"
"Yes, I decided what I really wanted to do was help the needy, cure the sick, treat the injured, and generally make the world a better place."
"oh... Well... we don't do much of that."
"Huh? What do you do?"
"We learn how to kill people without weapons!"

Yeah, I know that Monks the class don't necessarily devote themselves to a diety, but "Monk" is a religious thing.

Morty
2008-11-09, 04:42 PM
...since when has your class impacted how good roleplaying the players perform? I mean, it's not the class that does the roleplaying, it's the player. A Fighter could easily be roleplayed as a Monk. A Cleric too. And Unarmed Swordsage even more easily.

I think this statement might've been sarcastic, meaning that a monk can't do anything but roleplay. But I do have this weird habit of assuming that people aren't stupid.

RMS Oceanic
2008-11-09, 04:47 PM
Since this is the monk thread going on right now, I figured this would be a good place to ask:

In a Gestalt game with a ludicrously generous point buy system, is Fighter//Monk/Kensai any good?

streakster
2008-11-09, 04:49 PM
Since this is the monk thread going on right now, I figured this would be a good place to ask:

In a Gestalt game with a ludicrously generous point buy system, is Fighter//Monk/Kensai any good?

Ya know what would be better? Unarmed Swordsage/Kensai//Crusader.

monty
2008-11-09, 04:52 PM
Druid // Unarmed Swordsage? Simplify, simplify, simplify.

RMS Oceanic
2008-11-09, 04:53 PM
Ya know what would be better? Unarmed Swordsage/Kensai//Crusader.

Yeah, see, that doesn't answer my question.

MeklorIlavator
2008-11-09, 04:55 PM
What's the concept? What does Monk give you? Fighter?

streakster
2008-11-09, 04:58 PM
Yeah, see, that doesn't answer my question.

Okay, serious answer.

It could be good. It fixes a lot of the Monk's problems. You'll get your BAB and HD you need. You can wear armor now, so do that - count the Wis-to-AC as a nice backup if you're naked for some reason, and otherwise ignore it. I'd ignore a lot of your monk abilities, actually. Get some fun enchants on yourself - take flaming and throwing, for example, and you're the headless horseman! Or take morphing and sizing.

Mixing in ToB would be far better, though.

I'd wield a weapon, too, rather than use unarmed strike. Enchant that with Kensai - it'd be more functional than body enhancements.

RMS Oceanic
2008-11-09, 04:58 PM
Monk gives saves, evasion and unarmed damage. Fighter gives d10, full BAB and enough feats to spend on stuff like TWF to make flurry of blows hurt more. Kensai makes fists +5 weapons, as well as other abilities.

insecure
2008-11-09, 04:58 PM
What's the concept? What does Monk give you? Fighter?

Erm... The ability to attack without weapons?

monty
2008-11-09, 04:59 PM
It would be decent, yes. Certainly better than monk. But it wouldn't be much better than a regular well-built fighter, if at all. The fact is, unarmed fighting isn't very good compared to a charge fighter, or a spiked chain fighter, or any of a number of other builds that rely on weapons. The only other thing you'd really be getting from monk is the armor, which can be replicated with, well, armor.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-09, 05:03 PM
Are you starting with straight 18's? :smallwink:
I'm only being a bit sarcastic there

Well let's see what you end up with:
Full BAB: Nice, this is most assuredly a plus
d10 HD: Means that you can afford to give up con, granted I would focus on Int and take Faerie Mysteries Initiate and Kung Fu Genius still
Fighter weapon and armor proficiencies: A waste unless you are willing to go without most of the monk class features.
Feats: You finally have enough to make an ok Monk.

Basically, your maybe on par with a non gestalt ToB class. At level 20 you would have, assuming Grey Elf and 2 flaws, 24 feats (not counting the monk bonus feats) to pick as you want. Figure half of them are needed just too fix the monk up, although with high enough attributes you probably don't have to spend the 4 feats needed to get your unarmed strikes attack and damage working off Dex.

Hmm, you also have enough feats for the spring attack line, which as a monk your about the only class that can make it viable (Snap Kick means 2 attacks as a standard action). Throw in Leap of the Heavens, Wild Talent, and Up the Walls for some very good mobility (you can run along the ceiling and make massive standing long jumps). Add Psionic Fist and Greater Psionic Fist for 4d6 extra damage on your unarmed strike when you expend your psionic focus.

So yeah, with enough feats you can fill a pretty unique role (and for once you actually have enough feats).