Why be hatin'?

[Admiral Squish]

I don't really see how/why monks are treated so lowly. They have the same three important abilities as any other class, Dex, Wis, and Strength. (fighters need Strength, Dex, and Con, wizards need Int, Dex, and Con...) They have at level twenty a total BAB of 15, five points lower than a fighter, which is easily fixed with weapon finesse. Enchant a glove or gauntlet for your special powers, which is cheaper than pretty much any other weapon. Granted, some abilities really need rethinking, like Purity of Body, but that's a minor slight. You get some pretty useful abilities, like Abundant Step, Quivering Palm, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, Empty Body, Immunity to falling damage, poisons, all sorts of cool stuff. If you're so damn worried about being useful, take one of the "ascetic ____" feats, and go from there. Stop complaining, there's dozens of things you can do to make yourself a better character. I've got a warforged monk doing 3d6+1d6E+1d6F damage with every hit at level seven. I'm pretty sure that disproves your 'monks can't do damage' theory. Weapon finesse makes his Attack bonus +8, so 'can't hit anything' is out. 1d8 health only averages one lower than fighter's 1d10, so 'dies too quickly' is out. A well-made monk has an AC of at least 16, without any magical boosts, so 'gets hit by everything' isn't all that stable, either. What's your deal, monk haters?

[Lolzords]

This is something I never saw either, I'm not exactly a fan of monks, but there's a feat in complete warrior that lets you add 1d12 unarmed damage when you charge.

I don't like them that much, but I admire them.

[Morty]

Sweet Jesus, not another monk thread. You've probably just started another lenghty discussion that'll get dragged over 5 pages at which point everyone is arguing about single sentences from SRD.

[ZeroNumerous]

Fighters don't need DEX at all. They just need Gloves of DEX and full plate.

Wizards also don't need DEX. Again, Gloves of DEX makes up for all their ranged touch attack needs.

Further: Monks need STR to do damage in combat, and CHA to use their Lay on Hands ability. They also need DEX and WIS for defending themselves and using stunning fist. Plus CON, like any other class.

For your monk: My bard, at level seven, does 1d8+14. Unbuffed. Buffed, he does 2d8+36 a round. And he's not a battle-bard.

[PlatinumJester]

We're not hating on the monk, we just don't see the point of it especially with the Unarmed Swordsage Varient from ToB.

[Admiral Squish]

Fighters don't need DEX at all. They just need Gloves of DEX and full plate.

Wizards also don't need DEX. Again, Gloves of DEX makes up for all their ranged touch attack needs.

Further: Monks need STR to do damage in combat, and CHA to use their Lay on Hands ability. They also need DEX and WIS for defending themselves and using stunning fist. Plus CON, like any other class.

For your monk: My bard, at level seven, does 1d8+14. Unbuffed. Buffed, he does 2d8+36 a round. And he's not a battle-bard.

Same argument for monks, then. Why not Gauntlets of Ogre Power to make a monk more dangerous?

Monks don't have Lay on Hands.

I'm not even sure how +14 damage is even possible unbuffed. Can I get a breakdown?

[Fenix_of_Doom]

I don't really see how/why monks are treated so lowly. They have the same three important abilities as any other class, Dex, Wis, and Strength. (fighters need Strength, Dex, and Con, wizards need Int, Dex, and Con...)

And why do fighters require CON while monks don't?

They have at level twenty a total BAB of 15, five points lower than a fighter, which is easily fixed with weapon finesse. Enchant a glove or gauntlet for your special powers, which is cheaper than pretty much any other weapon.

5 points lower is enough to be harmful in a lot of situations, class features can make up for this, but the monks class feature unfortunately don't.
Weapon finesse fixes nothing as it gives no advantage to a full BaB class focusing on STR. You are not proficient with gauntlets, it's not much cheaper and you can't use them with your monk abilities, what argument?

Granted, some abilities really need rethinking, like Purity of Body, but that's a minor slight. You get some pretty useful abilities, like Abundant Step, Quivering Palm, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, Empty Body, Immunity to falling damage, poisons, all sorts of cool stuff. If you're so damn worried about being useful, take one of the "ascetic ____" feats, and go from there. Stop complaining, there's dozens of things you can do to make yourself a better character.

and flurry and movement increase and this and that, about every class feature need rethinking, that's the whole problem.
"ascetic ____" feats? monk stuff with only one level of monk, in other words monk build that try hard not being a monk, it doesn't really vouch for the class. There are plenty of things to do to better your character, most of them involving taking other classes and almost all work better with no monk levels at all.

I've got a warforged monk doing 3d6+1d6E+1d6F damage with every hit at level seven. I'm pretty sure that disproves your 'monks can't do damage' theory. Weapon finesse makes his Attack bonus +8, so 'can't hit anything' is out. 1d8 health only averages one lower than fighter's 1d10, so 'dies too quickly' is out. A well-made monk has an AC of at least 16, without any magical boosts, so 'gets hit by everything' isn't all that stable, either. What's your deal, monk haters?

Build please? Attack bonus +8 is NOT impressive, your right about the HD, but monks also tend to have lower con scores. I don't know at what level AC 16 is about, but that's also not impressive, in fact I've played a level 1 druid with 17 AC.
Last nobody claims they get hit by everything, in fact people are shouting:"monks can't do anything but survive".

For your information, there is a test running that is about the efficiency of a level 20 monk right now, maybe you should see how it turns out.

Edit:

Same argument for monks, then. Why not Gauntlets of Ogre Power to make a monk more dangerous?

Monks don't have Lay on Hands.

I'm not even sure how +14 damage is even possible unbuffed. Can I get a breakdown?

Because they have less body slots to fill and more stats to boost. They also needs to stats to be higher, a fighter in full plate often has enough at 12 dex(edit2: small oversight; mithral makes that 16).

the lay on hands was probebly an (small) oversight.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Sweet Jesus, not another monk thread. You've probably just started another lenghty discussion that'll get dragged over 5 pages at which point everyone is arguing about single sentences from SRD.

Why wait 5 pages when it is already possible to bring up that monks are not proficient with gauntlets, gloves are not weapons, and neither are special monk weapons.

And that is even before someone shows that all class features can be easily duplicated or are not really that good.

Followed by someone showing that the monk is indeed crazy MAD.

Countered by Giacomo saying that the monk can just take UMD....

Did I miss anything?

[ZeroNumerous]

Same argument for monks, then. Why not Gauntlets of Ogre Power to make a monk more dangerous?

Because he has to spend those Gauntlets of Ogre Power money on his Amulet of Wisdom. Or his Gloves of Dex. Or his Amulet of Con. Do you see the problem here?

Monks don't have Lay on Hands.

Wholeness of Body. I was wrong, it doesn't rely on Cha, but it's still a ridiculous ability stuck in at an arbitrary level.

I'm not even sure how +14 damage is even possible unbuffed. Can I get a breakdown?

STR 14, Two-handing, Island of Blade's Stance, Shadowblade, and Power Attacking for 7.

End result: +2+1+4+7=14.

Snowflake Wardance and Weapon Finesse puts him at a +6 to hit, including his constant flanking bonus.

And thats ignoring any weapon enhancements.

[mostlyharmful]

Same argument for monks, then. Why not Gauntlets of Ogre Power to make a monk more dangerous?

Because in order to match a fighter with mithril fullplate and gloves of dex your Wis + Dex have to be astronomical. Simultaneously while the fighter boosts Dex a little and Str and Con as much as possible the Monk needs naturally high scores in at least FOUR abilities, stat boosts for those abilities, bracers of armour and they still don't keep pace in BAB or damage output. while you can build a vaguely useful monk it takes a LOOOOT more work than just giving the fighter a greatsword and fullplate. And then the fighter can be optimized to beyound silly either as a redclouder or a Mctripper build.

[Tengu]

I am hatin', I am hatin',
Monk thread again cross the sea.
I am hatin', stormy forums,
Drop that topic, and be free.

[kamikasei]

I suspect that such game elements as monks, warlocks and Monkey Grip would not be nearly so heavily derided if it weren't for their "first impression" value that leads to naive newbies making statements about how lolzuberpwnzor their monkey-gripping dual-greatsword-wielding monk/warlock is because he can blast all day and flurry with 3d6 damage in each hand!!!

Which is not to say that those things would be better, but I think people take fewer pains to point out how they're bad.

[Fenix_of_Doom]

Another important point is that many, including myself, do not even hate the monk, we're just realistic and see that it is a weak and poorly designed class.

I personally like the idea behind it and I think it's a pity they didn't give it full BaB and some more useful class features.

[Mr.Bookworm]

First off:

I love monks, and I find them nice to play, but compared against a decently optimized, say, Fighter, they suck.

So:

I don't really see how/why monks are treated so lowly.

'Cause compared against other classes, in all the areas the Monk looks like it should be able to compete in (which are a lot), it's worse. Monks are actually decent as scouts and as mage-killers, but otherwise, you usually need to be pretty good at D&D to pull off a great Monk.

They have the same three important abilities as any other class, Dex, Wis, and Strength. (fighters need Strength, Dex, and Con, wizards need Int, Dex, and Con...)

Bzzt.

Monks have been shown to need Str (for damage output), Dex (y'know), Con (for those precious HPs), and Wis (obviously, for class features). Furthermore, want any skill points? Well, that's Int, so...

They have at level twenty a total BAB of 15, five points lower than a fighter, which is easily fixed with weapon finesse. Enchant a glove or gauntlet for your special powers, which is cheaper than pretty much any other weapon.

But Monks look like they should be able to throw down in a brawl.

This is simply not the case. 3/4 BAB really hurts the Monk in a fight.

Granted, some abilities really need rethinking, like Purity of Body, but that's a minor slight. You get some pretty useful abilities, like Abundant Step, Quivering Palm, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, Empty Body, Immunity to falling damage, poisons, all sorts of cool stuff.

Abundant Step is once a day, Quivering Palm, while awesome, is once a week. The rest of those come too late, and are generally cool, but not that useful.

If you're so damn worried about being useful, take one of the "ascetic ____" feats, and go from there.

But the point is that a character shouldn't have to take feats to be useful. Well, besides a Fighter.

Stop complaining, there's dozens of things you can do to make yourself a better character.

A character shouldn't have to actively optimize to be useful.

I've got a warforged monk doing 3d6+1d6E+1d6F damage with every hit at level seven.

No one's arguing that it's impossible to have fun and do stuff good with a Monk, just hard.

I'm pretty sure that disproves your 'monks can't do damage' theory.

A Monk's damage problems start later, when massive Power Attacks (plus the Fighter's +3 Vorpal Flaming Shocking Greatsword) and 15d8+30 damage Evocations appear. Monks simply can't keep up.

Weapon finesse makes his Attack bonus +8, so 'can't hit anything' is out.

Again, 3/4 BAB really hurts. Weapon Finesse might help temporarily, but again, you have to use a feat.

1d8 health only averages one lower than fighter's 1d10, so 'dies too quickly' is out.

Let's compare a 10th level Monk and a 10th level Fighter with each other, shall we? Both have a Con of 16 (I'm being generous here, most Monks I've seen have a 12 or 14), and get full HP at 1st level, and 1/2 at the following.

That means the Fighter will have 85 HP, while the Monk will have 74. A 11 point difference. It would probably be more like a 20 point difference if we didn't give the Monk a generous Con score.

HP matters a lot for a melee class, like the Monk.

A well-made monk has an AC of at least 16, without any magical boosts, so 'gets hit by everything' isn't all that stable, either.

And a well-made Fighter can have an AC in the low/mid-20s.

16 isn't enough for a class that is supposed to fight in a melee.

What's your deal, monk haters?

See above, even though I'm not a Monk hater.

EDIT:

Hm.

Ninja'd.

Ain't that a surprise.

[Solo]

I am hatin', I am hatin',
Monk thread again cross the sea.
I am hatin', stormy forums,
Drop that topic, and be free.

Can you hear me, can you hear me
Through the forums, far away,
I am dying, forever trying,
To help you, on this day.

[Fax Celestis]

They have the same three important abilities as any other class, Dex, Wis, and Strength. (fighters need Strength, Dex, and Con, wizards need Int, Dex, and Con...)

Incorrect. Most melee combatants need two statistics: STR and CON. DEX can be tossed unless you're either a finesse-style fighter or are light-armor only--in which case you're not a tank, you're a skirmisher. The monk does alright as a skirmisher but for the fact that skirmishing denies them the use of one of their main class features: Flurry of Blows. Of course there are ways around this, but one should not have to spend feats or multiclass to make a class good.

They have at level twenty a total BAB of 15, five points lower than a fighter, which is easily fixed with weapon finesse. Enchant a glove or gauntlet for your special powers, which is cheaper than pretty much any other weapon.

Five points of BAB is 25% less chance of landing a blow, mathematically. Further, it means one fewer attack in a full-attack routine. It means a more difficult time grappling, tripping, sundering, disarming, or resisting any of the above. And again, one should never have to spend a feat to make a class' features good. Oh, and by the way: recent FAQ says you can't use enchanted gauntlets as a monk.

Granted, some abilities really need rethinking, like Purity of Body, but that's a minor slight. You get some pretty useful abilities, like Abundant Step, Quivering Palm, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, Empty Body, Immunity to falling damage, poisons, all sorts of cool stuff.

Sure, most of the abilities of the monk are nifty. But how many of them synchronize with each other into a cohesive whole? We've got teleportation, save or die, tongues, miss chance, falling...almost none of which is usable with another class feature at the same time. Some of the levels where abilities are gained seems arbitrary, and a lot of the more notable abilities (such as Wis-to-AC and evasion) are frontloaded, making the monk class dippable and then ignored afterwards.

If you're so damn worried about being useful, take one of the "ascetic ____" feats, and go from there. Stop complaining, there's dozens of things you can do to make yourself a better character. I've got a warforged monk doing 3d6+1d6E+1d6F damage with every hit at level seven. I'm pretty sure that disproves your 'monks can't do damage' theory.

If you were a higher-BABed character, you'd be able to Power Attack for more. Further, you wouldn't have to worry about getting smacked upside the head as much, since you'd be able to wear actual armor. Consider thus: a fighter wears full-plate +1, something easily affordable, findable, and common. In order to get the same defense, a monk will have to have WIS of 28. Alright, maybe 24 considering the class AC bonus, but still: a different meleer can spend his time making his STR better (and therefore hitting more often and hitting harder when he does) instead of fighting to keep his AC competitive. And again, you shouldn't have to spend feats to make your class good.

Weapon finesse makes his Attack bonus +8, so 'can't hit anything' is out.

To keep from repeating myself, just reread the last paragraph.

1d8 health only averages one lower than fighter's 1d10, so 'dies too quickly' is out. A well-made monk has an AC of at least 16, without any magical boosts, so 'gets hit by everything' isn't all that stable, either. What's your deal, monk haters?

HP is not the basis of the dies too quickly argument: AC is. A monk has to sink a lot of money into equipment to keep his AC competitive with another melee class', particularly those with heavy armor proficiency, money the monk could be spending on enchanted monk weapons, mobility enhancers, Strength and Constitution improvers, and similar.

[Morty]

Did I miss anything?

I think you missed someone suggesting in a condescending manner that people should stop deeming classes by their power. Other than that, you;ve covered it.

[Draz74]

I've got a warforged monk doing 3d6+1d6E+1d6F damage with every hit at level seven. I'm pretty sure that disproves your 'monks can't do damage' theory. Weapon finesse makes his Attack bonus +8, so 'can't hit anything' is out. 1d8 health only averages one lower than fighter's 1d10, so 'dies too quickly' is out.

First, you're using houserules or controversial rules interpretations that allow you to make magic gauntlets or gloves to improve a monk's unarmed attacks with weapon enhancements on them. This is a good houserule to help the monk out, but DMs going strictly by the RAW won't allow it.

You're doing 17.5 average damage per hit, using gloves that should cost at least 18000 gp to add that elemental damage. Almost all of your recommended 19000 wealth is in those gloves. Yikes! Most DMs won't let you get such an item at Level 7.

A generic human fighter at level 7, who's using his wealth in a much more balanced way and therefore has a +1 Shock Greatsword and +2 Gauntlets of Ogre Power (and still 7000 gp for defensive/utility stuff), will be doing 2d6+6+1d6E damage, or 16.5 average damage per attack. That's assuming he only started with a 15 STR due to the Elite Array (conservative), and it's also if he's not using his main source of bonus damage (Power Attack). And he's still very close to equaling your average damage.

Your monk has BAB +5. The Fighter has +7. You spent a feat on Weapon Finesse, but he spent that same feat on something more useful (let's assume Power Attack) and he's getting a +11 attack bonus (including STR) where you're getting a +8 attack bonus (including DEX). That extra +3 matters! Plus, the Fighter gets a second attack if he gets a full attack. You don't, unless you use Flurry. If you use Flurry, you're down to +7/+7 attacks, while the Fighter is doing +11/+6 attacks. He's clearly more likely to hit than you.

The 7 extra HP the Fighter has due to bigger hit dice isn't very impressive. But you didn't list CON as one of the Monk's "main three" abilities, and you did list it as one of the Fighter's. So the Fighter may be quite a bit tougher indeed, depending on how the abilities are distributed.

A well-made monk has an AC of at least 16, without any magical boosts, so 'gets hit by everything' isn't all that stable, either. What's your deal, monk haters?

A well-made generic fighter has an AC of at least 18 without any magical boosts. It's called Full Plate.

Also, remember that you're comparing the Monk to the Fighter in all of this. The Monk would look even worse if you were comparing him to the Barbarian.

[streakster]

I've said it once. I'll say it again.

If you like the monk, play it. Have fun. The numbers be damned - if all you want is big numbers, go play Pun Pun. You think it's weak? Don't play it.

There. Now we'll never have another thread about this again. We're done.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I think you missed someone suggesting in a condescending manner that people should stop deeming classes by their power. Other than that, you;ve covered it.

Ahhh yes, and now that is covered too.

I will get some popcorn and see how this goes...

[PlatinumJester]

There. Now we'll never have another thread about this again. We're done.

If only, that were true. There will always be some newbie who looks at the monk's arsenal of crap class abilities and think that it is uber pimp. I did, and I bet alot of you did when you first read the monk section in the PHB. Then you came here and were proven wrong.

[Raider]

Monks are the whipping boy of DnD.

But they have some crazy sweet abilities if you play them right

[Raider]

Sorry, double post

[Fenix_of_Doom]

HP is not the basis of the dies too quickly argument: AC is. A monk has to sink a lot of money into equipment to keep his AC competitive with another melee class', particularly those with heavy armor proficiency, money the monk could be spending on enchanted monk weapons, mobility enhancers, Strength and Constitution improvers, and similar.

I stand corrected, people are arguing a monk dies to fast.


On a totally unrelated not: we're playing with the titans now! be careful not to get crushed.

[Admiral Squish]

A big issue I'm seeing is people keep comparing the monk to the fighter. This is simply unfair. A fighter has about a gazillion feats to utterly tweak himself into next month, has full plate (which is A: expensive, B: doesn't apply to touch attacks like the monk bonus, C: limits your speed, D: has a max dex bonus of +1, E: is basically a fighter-only option, and F: has ridiculous Armor Check penalties.), and has shields (see above).

Another problem is people keep saying you shouldn't have to take feats to make a class effective. BULL. What would a fighter be without his feats? Also, why do they have metamagic feats (which are commonly touted as 'cannot live without')? Why have class-specific feats at all? THe problem is eveyone's so focused on twinking out their character that you can't play anything less than a fully-optimized person, leaving the poor monk in the dust.

THe enchanted gauntlet thing seems to be another issue. If you cannot use your monk abilities with gauntlets why do they make battlefists?

My build is warforged+ battlefist (one size up from medium for monk damage and a +1 enhancement included for 2700g)+ Improved Natural Attack (up another die size), Shock Enhancement (1d6E, add 6000g), and Fiery Fists (one stunning fist use for +1d6 fire damage for one turn). Also, enchant the Composite plate for 2+3 AC (10000g). This was made to compete with a mostly optimized party, so I'm not saying everyone should go this way.

[Fax Celestis]

Another problem is people keep saying you shouldn't have to take feats to make a class effective. BULL. What would a fighter be without his feats? Also, why do they have metamagic feats (which are commonly touted as 'cannot live without')? Why have class-specific feats at all? THe problem is eveyone's so focused on twinking out their character that you can't play anything less than a fully-optimized person, leaving the poor monk in the dust.

A fighter's class features are feats. A wizard's class features are better with metamagic. This is Different™. A class that requires specific feats to function that it does not receive as bonus feats is a poorly designed class. You can play a perfectly acceptable rogue without weapon finesse, for example, or a wizard without metamagic. Just because a feat makes something better doesn't mean it's required. And that is part of the monk's problem: it requires expenditure into several feats that it doesn't get for free to remain competitive, a problem that nearly no other class has.

THe enchanted gauntlet thing seems to be another issue. If you cannot use your monk abilities with gauntlets why do they make battlefists?

For fighters and barbarians who like punching things.

[Fenix_of_Doom]

A big issue I'm seeing is people keep comparing the monk to the fighter. This is simply unfair. A fighter has about a gazillion feats to utterly tweak himself into next month, has full plate (which is A: expensive, B: doesn't apply to touch attacks like the monk bonus, C: limits your speed, D: has a max dex bonus of +1, E: is basically a fighter-only option, and F: has ridiculous Armor Check penalties.), and has shields (see above).

First, a fighter is considered weak, if we can't compared it to a fighter to what should we compare it? a CW samurai?
Second those disadvantages are considered to be worth it, you should also take note of master work and mithral.

Another problem is people keep saying you shouldn't have to take feats to make a class effective. BULL. What would a fighter be without his feats? Also, why do they have metamagic feats (which are commonly touted as 'cannot live without')? Why have class-specific feats at all? THe problem is eveyone's so focused on twinking out their character that you can't play anything less than a fully-optimized person, leaving the poor monk in the dust.

No, they're not saying that, they're saying you shouldn't have to optimise the hell out of a class just to make it reasonable.

THe enchanted gauntlet thing seems to be another issue. If you cannot use your monk abilities with gauntlets why do they make battlefists?

My build is warforged+ battlefist (one size up from medium for monk damage and a +1 enhancement included for 2700g)+ Improved Natural Attack (up another die size), Shock Enhancement (1d6E, add 6000g), and Fiery Fists (one stunning fist use for +1d6 fire damage for one turn). Also, enchant the Composite plate for 2+3 AC (10000g). This was made to compete with a mostly optimized party, so I'm not saying everyone should go this way.

I think I see your mistake now, a monk can use gauntlets of ogre strength and the like, but these don't count as the "gauntlet weapon" as such I don't think you can enchant it as a weapon.
Edit: I was wrong, now what exactly is a battlefist?
BTW, what's a composite plate?

[Illiterate Scribe]

I am hatin', I am hatin',
Monk thread again cross the sea.
I am hatin', stormy forums,
Drop that topic, and be free.

They see me rollin' up my batman wizard
They hatin'
Patrollin' the new threads.

[ZeroNumerous]

A big issue I'm seeing is people keep comparing the monk to the fighter.

I compared your monk to a bard. Isn't that more fair?

E: is basically a fighter-only option, and F: has ridiculous Armor Check penalties.), and has shields (see above).

So Clerics don't wear Full-Plate? Barbarian's don't wear Mithral Full Plate? I'm sorry, that doesn't make sense.

This was made to compete with a mostly optimized party, so I'm not saying everyone should go this way.

Did it work?

They see me rollin' up my batman wizard
They hatin'
Patrollin' the new threads.

I wanna roll with the fighters
But so far they think I'm too
Monk and nerdy.

[Admiral Squish]

I think I see your mistake now, a monk can use gauntlets of ogre strength and the like, but these don't count as the "gauntlet weapon" as such I don't think you can enchant it as a weapon.
Edit: I was wrong, now what exactly is a battlefist?
BTW, what's a composite plate?

A battlefist is a warforged component. It makes a monk's unarmed strike damage go up as though he were one size larger.

Composite plating is a warforged racial feature. Like armor, but doesn't count against monk features since they're basically made with it on.