PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Monk Playtest



Gralamin
2009-05-10, 11:19 PM
So we've got our Psionic Striker. I'm reading over it now. Got questions?

Colmarr
2009-05-10, 11:22 PM
Psionic? Hmmm.

Are they damage-based like the ranger, or debuff-based like the warlock?

Gralamin
2009-05-10, 11:41 PM
Psionic? Hmmm.

Are they damage-based like the ranger, or debuff-based like the warlock?

The monks focus is: Mobility, Debuff, and Utility.

To understand monks your going to have to learn a new keyword: Full Discipline. I'm going to paste that here:


Full Discipline
Many monk powers have the full discipline keyword.
A full discipline power gives you two or
more actions to choose from, usually an attack
technique and a movement technique. Attack
techniques usually require a standard action,
and movement techniques are options for your
move actions. For a monk, a full discipline power
represents a fighting style, a unique combination
of a move and an attack.
You can use only one full discipline power
per round. However, if you spend an action
point to take an extra action, you can switch to
a different full discipline power. You can use the
techniques of a full discipline power in whatever
order you like, and you can choose to use one of
the techniques and not the other during a particular
round.
The number of times you can use a full
discipline power’s techniques during a round
is determined by the power’s type—at-will or
encounter—and by the actions you have available
that round. For example, you can use the
techniques of an at-will full discipline power as
many times during a round as you like, provided
you have enough of the required actions, but
you can use the techniques of an encounter full
discipline power once during a round

I'll post a single at-will here to let you guys get an idea of how it looks.


Dragon’s Tail Monk Attack 1
Your hand lashes out like a dragon’s tail, and with the
lightest touch unleashes power that knocks your foe to the
ground.
At-Will ✦ Full Discipline, Implement, Psionic

Attack Technique
Standard Action Melee touch
Target: One creature
Attack: Dexterity vs. Fortitude
Hit: 1dX + Dexterity modifier damage, and you knock
the target prone.

Movement Technique
Move Action Personal
Effect: You swap places with an adjacent ally or an
adjacent prone enemy

Colmarr
2009-05-10, 11:47 PM
Dragon's Tail

So the most maligned power name in 4e actually made it into a rulebook, minor amendments notwithstanding? :smallbiggrin:

So, to make sure I understand, if a monk used Dragon's tail for the movement effect, then (barring action points), they are locked into using either the Dragon's tail attack or a basic attack that round?

Sounds interesting. Similar to a stance that be changed from round to round.

RTGoodman
2009-05-11, 12:02 AM
I'm... intrigued. I like what I've seen so far, but the Full Discipline thing is kinda weird.

One thing I did notice is that there's now an Expertise feat for Sorcerers and Monks and others that use a WEAPON as an Implement.

EDIT: Also, if you need me, I'll be in the corner eating my boot because of my prediction of the Monk as a from the "Ki" power source. :smalltongue:

Gralamin
2009-05-11, 12:04 AM
So the most maligned power name in 4e actually made it into a rulebook, minor amendments notwithstanding? :smallbiggrin:

So, to make sure I understand, if a monk used Dragon's tail for the movement effect, then (barring action points), they are locked into using either the Dragon's tail attack or a basic attack that round?

Sounds interesting. Similar to a stance that be changed from round to round.

Yes. Also: Their Abilities are Dex, Wis, Str, with this article being Dex and Wis.

Class Features:
Monastic Tradition (Centered Breath) - Basically like a warlock pact. You get one at-will class feature flurry of blows, and a benefit (+1 fort per tier here).

The effect of this Flurry of blows:

Effect: The target takes damage equal to your Wisdom
modifier. If the target was not a target of the
triggering attack, you can slide the target 1 square to
a square adjacent to you.

Unarmed Combatant: Monk Unarmed Strike weapon. +3 Prof, 1d8 damage, offhand, unarmed group. Also:

The Enchant Magic Item ritual (Player’s Handbook,
page 304) can be used to turn your monk unarmed
strike into a magic weapon. For example, through
that ritual, you could have a +1 flaming monk unarmed
strike.
Unarmored Defense: Passive bonus to AC in unarmored.


Monk Weapons
Some of your powers might require you to attack
with a monk weapon. The following weapons count
as monk weapons: unarmed attacks, clubs, daggers,
quarterstaffs, and spears.

Monk unarmed strike apparently isn't a monk weapon... I'm guessing thats an error.

There is also a New feat: Focused Expertise. Its Weapon / Implement Expertise, but basically one feat to combine them. So if you were a swordmage, you could take Focused Expertise (Heavy Blade) rather then Weapon and Implement Expertise.

---

According to design and development, Ki power source has been offed.



The biggest, and perhaps most obvious, change is that the monk is now psionic. How, you might ask, did that happen? The monk ended up where it did because the ki power source proved untenable and psionics is the next best fit.

...

We also didn't want to simply shove all the classes inspired by Asian cultures into one power source for the sake of bundling them together. Frankly, that strikes me as equivalent to piling every class drawn from Western cultures into the same source. Does it make sense to group witches, knights, jesters, and friars into one power source?

The concept of the monk drawing energy from within was a good match for psionics. When we looked at classes like the shugenja, the wu jen, the ninja, and the samurai, we came to similar conclusions in matching them to other power sources. In some cases, like the samurai, we're more excited about using an approach similar to the Dragon articles on gladiators and assassins.

RTGoodman
2009-05-11, 12:17 AM
Yes. Also: Their Abilities are Dex, Wis, Str, with this article being Dex and Wis.

Which is excellent - it means my second-favorite character ever, a Half-Orc Monk named Krell, can be good in 4E.


Monk unarmed strike apparently isn't a monk weapon... I'm guessing thats an error.

It does say that unarmed attacks are monk weapons. Wouldn't that count? Either way, they'll fix it if not. That's what these playtest articles are for, after all.


According to design and development, Ki power source has been offed.

Yeah, just saw that. Makes sense, I guess. That's a pretty good article in general, too.

Elemental_Elf
2009-05-11, 12:29 AM
So, to make sure I understand, if a monk used Dragon's tail for the movement effect, then (barring action points), they are locked into using either the Dragon's tail attack or a basic attack that round?

The Monk could use any other ability unless it it has the Full Discipline descriptor. If the ability (like Dragon's Tail) is an At Will, then the Monk may use his move action to utilize the movement based ability of the power and a standard action to use the attack portion of the power. For encounter powers, the Monk is forced to choose one or the other (movement or combat).

As for your question, unless the Monk uses an action point, he would be locked into the Dragons Tail.

EDIT: A Monk could also use the following class feature (instead of Dragon Tail)


Centered Flurry of Blows Monk Feature
You strike with incredible speed, your fists a blur as you
follow up your initial attack with another.
At-Will • Implement, Psionic
Free Action (Special) Melee touch
Trigger: You hit with an attack during your turn
Target: One creature
Level 11: One or two creatures
Level 21: Each enemy adjacent to you

Effect: The target takes damage equal to your Wisdom
modifier. If the target was not a target of the
triggering attack, you can slide the target 1 square to
a square adjacent to you.

Special: You can use this power only once per round

Colmarr
2009-05-11, 12:32 AM
Double post.

Colmarr
2009-05-11, 12:35 AM
Monastic Tradition (Centered Breath) - Basically like a warlock pact. You get one at-will class feature flurry of blows, and a benefit (+1 fort per tier here).

I don't follow this.

Do you mean that Flurry of Blows is like Eldritch Blast (all monks have it), but that Flurries from different schools have different effects.

And the quote you pasted referred to a target not being the target of the triggering attack, which seems nonsensical. Please explain :smallsmile:

EDIT: Is this a forum first? Having your question answered by the ninja who got in before you... :smallbiggrin:

Elemental_Elf
2009-05-11, 12:35 AM
I don't follow this.

Do you mean that Flurry of Blows is like Eldritch Blast (all monks have it), but that Flurries from different schools have different effects.

And the quote you pasted referred to a target not being the target of the triggering attack, which seems nonsensical. Please explain :smallsmile:

The Monk's class features are based on the Tradition he chooses. In the playtest we are only given the following:


Class Features
Monks of the Centered Breath tradition gain the Flurry of Blows power [called] centered flurry of blows.

Gralamin
2009-05-11, 12:38 AM
It does say that unarmed attacks are monk weapons. Wouldn't that count? Either way, they'll fix it if not. That's what these playtest articles are for, after all.

No, and I've sent them an Email about it. Lets follow the logic here, taking out all the names to make it generic as possible.

<Weapon> has <Stats> and is part of the <WeaponGroup> group. When you make an attack with <OtherWeapon> you may use <Weapon> instead.

<Class> Weapons include <OtherWeapon> and a bunch of other stuff.

Since <Weapon> isn't in the list, <Weapon> isn't a <Class> Weapon. If you make an attack with <OtherWeapon> and use a <Weapon> instead, you are not using a <Class> Weapon.

So lets take this and apply say... Rogue, with <Weapon> being Parrying Dagger, and <OtherWeapon> being Dagger. It would look like:
Parrying Dagger has <Stats> and is part of the Light Blade group. When you make an attack with a Dagger you may use a Parrying Dagger instead. [true: If you hold a parrying dagger and would make an attack, you could use the parrying dagger instead of the dagger]

Rogue Weapons include Dagger and a bunch of other stuff.

Since Parrying Dagger isn't in the list, Parrying Dagger isn't a Rogue Weapon. If you make an attack with Dagger and use a Parrying Dagger instead, you are not using a Rogue Weapon.

This is valid, so now lets try Monk.

Monk Unarmed Strike (MUS) has <Stats> and is part of the Unarmed group. When you make an attack with Unarmed Attack (UA) you may use MUS instead.

Monk Weapons include UA and a bunch of other stuff.

Since MUS isn't in the list, MUS isn't a Monk Weapon. If you make an attack with UA and use a MUS instead, you are not using a MUS Weapon.

---

Also, they forgot level 22 powers.

NPCMook
2009-05-11, 12:51 AM
Did anyone else notice that Monk's Unarmed attacks have Reach?

Gralamin
2009-05-11, 12:52 AM
Did anyone else notice that Monk's Unarmed attacks have Reach?

Reach 1 is the same as Attacking a square adjacent. Reach 2 is attacking two squares away. Reach 3 is attacking three, etc.

RTGoodman
2009-05-11, 01:19 AM
Reach 1 is the same as Attacking a square adjacent. Reach 2 is attacking two squares away. Reach 3 is attacking three, etc.

Yep. Of course, it's not too hard to imagine a few monk disciplines that allow you to make an attack with reach. Fighters have 'em already, I think, at least in Martial Power.

We'll see what they do as far as fixing the unarmed strike thing, too.

The New Bruceski
2009-05-11, 01:19 AM
The Monk could use any other ability unless it it has the Full Discipline descriptor. If the ability (like Dragon's Tail) is an At Will, then the Monk may use his move action to utilize the movement based ability of the power and a standard action to use the attack portion of the power. For encounter powers, the Monk is forced to choose one or the other (movement or combat).


I understand it a bit differently.
--If you use an at-will discipline, you can use each piece of it as many times as you want (take two move actions, or action-point into a second attack).
--If you use an encounter one, each piece can only be used once, but both can be used.

Asbestos
2009-05-11, 01:46 AM
I understand it a bit differently.
--If you use an at-will discipline, you can use each piece of it as many times as you want (take two move actions, or action-point into a second attack).
--If you use an encounter one, each piece can only be used once, but both can be used.

This is how I interpret it as well and it seems the only sensible interpretation (else wise the move actions are almost completely worthless)

Edit: This is also backed up by the fluff text for almost every single encounter power. The fluff clearly describes the power as being both a move and a standard action in the same round. Examples: "You leap into the air and land on your foe’s back. From there, you rain blows on it as it tries to dislodge you.", "You move in a blur, tumbling around a foe, and deliver a sweeping kick with such ferocity that thunderous energy blasts both that foe and its companion.", "You lurch seemingly out of control. Your enemies are bewildered as they try to hit your swaying form, and with a cunning jab, you cause your foe to attack its companion."

NPCMook
2009-05-11, 02:29 AM
Hmm, I'm not sure on that, most Polearms have Reach 1 and those attack two squares away

skywalker
2009-05-11, 02:38 AM
EDIT: Also, if you need me, I'll be in the corner eating my boot because of my prediction of the Monk as a from the "Ki" power source. :smalltongue:

You're not the only one... I think most of us are surprised.


Hmm, I'm not sure on that, most Polearms have Reach 1 and those attack two squares away

I believe this is the case as well. Could someone post an example of how "reach 1" is used?

EDIT: The PHB describes humans as having a "reach of 1" and also has a chart that lists a variety of numbers below the word "reach," with humans getting a 1 on the chart as well.

A creature with reach 1 can attack adjacent squares only. Confusingly, they apparently included the phrase "reach 1" despite the fact that according to the MM, creatures with an unusual reach will include a reach number. This seems to imply that "reach 1" is an unusual reach, when in fact it is not. Bad idea for Wizards to even include that phrase, it will only generate confusion.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-11, 04:39 AM
Hmm, I'm not sure on that, most Polearms have Reach 1 and those attack two squares away

Wrong. They have the "reach" property, no numbers. And it's defined as:

Reach: With a reach weapon, you can attack
enemies that are 2 squares away from you as well as
adjacent enemies, with no attack penalty. You can
still make opportunity attacks only against adjacent
enemies. Likewise, you can flank only an adjacent
enemy.

Tyrmatt
2009-05-11, 04:57 AM
Upon seeing the Reach description, I suddenly have the urge to shout YOGA FIRE!
Looking nifty gifty here for the Monk. I need to give the article an in-depth look but the last time I had any contact with a monk was second edition so this looks to make him a little more effective :D

Oslecamo
2009-05-11, 05:05 AM
Monks....Psionic?:smalleek:

RAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE:smallfurious:

Yeah, sure, because indeed martial arts is all about training your mind and not your body, so of course martial power source wasn't fiting for monks.

Also I hardly see a problem with a ki power source. There's several other classes that could have been ki-based. Now we'll never see them. Stupid streamlining.

kamikasei
2009-05-11, 05:32 AM
Monks....Psionic?:smalleek:

Yeah, sure, because indeed martial arts is all about training your mind and not your body, so of course martial power source wasn't fiting for monks.

Eh; D&D monks are so out-there in terms of their abilities that "martial" doesn't really seem to cut it. Ki makes perfect sense for them, but works perfectly well as a physically-focused application of psionics. Makes more sense for a monk to be psionic than a Soulknife, if you ask me.

Wire-fu "martial arts" are indeed more about training the mind/will/spirit than the body (or about training the latter to focus and unleash the former).

Oslecamo
2009-05-11, 05:50 AM
Eh; D&D monks are so out-there in terms of their abilities that "martial" doesn't really seem to cut it. Ki makes perfect sense for them, but works perfectly well as a physically-focused application of psionics. Makes more sense for a monk to be psionic than a Soulknife, if you ask me.


Cough Warlord Cough

If any frontline guy should be a psionic here it would be it. He's the one buffing up people's spirits and completely out of line of the usual martial D&D characters.



Wire-fu "martial arts" are indeed more about training the mind/will/spirit than the body (or about training the latter to focus and unleash the former).

I beg to greatly disagree.

First, the body training must be at least as much if not more intense than the mind training. Even stuff like judo that relies little in muscle strenght still demands a lot of practicce for you to be effective with it.

Second, learning how to properly swing a pointy stick or bow also demands a good deal of mind training.

Not to mention the paladin. He's killing people with his strenght of will.
The cleric could also be argued to be doing that.

So, by that line of reasoning, every martial and divine power source guy should actuall be psionic, because they're also thinking and using their inner strenght/will in order to hit harder.

Well, except the barbarian of course.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-11, 06:17 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't give jack about power sources? Monk's power source could as well be Years Of Vigorously Watching Wuxia Movies and I couldn't care less.

kamikasei
2009-05-11, 06:50 AM
Cough Warlord Cough

Eh. I don't know the details of his powers, but the concept seems solidly and justifiably Martial to me.


I beg to greatly disagree.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I don't mean that martial arts should be Psionic rather than Martial. I mean that the Monk is not just a martial artist (and I wish there was a proper martial arts class without the wire-fu trappings of the Monk), and that he can be as well justified as Psionic as Ki. Ki seems to be to be basically "like psionics, but doing awesome stuff with your own body rather than reaching beyond it with your mental focus".

Of course, it'll depend on the actual powers available to the monk whether they seem to deserve some other power source than Martial at all; I'm going off the sort of things 3.5 monks could do.


Not to mention the paladin. He's killing people with his strenght of will.
The cleric could also be argued to be doing that.

So, by that line of reasoning, every martial and divine power source guy should actuall be psionic, because they're also thinking and using their inner strenght/will in order to hit harder.

This is rather silly.

Asbestos
2009-05-11, 07:13 AM
The monk: More or less melee controller than the Predator Druid or Artful Dodger Rogue?

Seems like more to me, especially since if the monk hits anyone with any power (or a melee basic attack) then someone (or some people) are getting slid.

Oslecamo
2009-05-11, 07:36 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't give jack about power sources? Monk's power source could as well be Years Of Vigorously Watching Wuxia Movies and I couldn't care less.

Hmm, you're kinda right. For all we've seen a class's power source means less than costless material components in 3.X.

Guess I'll just have to ignore it like all the silly deitology and alignment system 4e brought on.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-11, 07:40 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't give jack about power sources? Monk's power source could as well be Years Of Vigorously Watching Wuxia Movies and I couldn't care less.

They seem completely irrelevant to play. "Ki," especially in the kung fu movie sense, is already nearly identical to "psionics" as a concept.

Asbestos
2009-05-11, 07:50 AM
Actually power source does mean something since there are a large number of feats that are power source specific.

Anyway, I didn't really like the idea of Ki back in 3.x when Psionics was right there. I mean come on, the monk was teleporting and feather falling while the ninja was moving through other planes of existence. Ki just seemed almost exactly like psionics (in fluff and practice) but 'more Asian'. I think the designers back then were like 'Oh, an Asian-flavored class with supernatural abilities? Clearly it channels Ki'


I can see why they made it so monks can use 'enchant item' to enchant their unarmed attacks (so monks don't get free magic weapons/monks can actually have non-suck magic weapons) but it presents some silliness. For instance having your MUS be a Frost Weapon and headbutting (an example given in the description of MUS) someone with the Frost Weapon Daily... talk about brain freeze.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-11, 08:01 AM
The only explicit Ki reference 3.5 monks had was Ki Strike, anyway. Whether they used superior physical and/or mental training, latent psionics, magic, or divine power varied by character. (In fact, in Faerûn, most monks were probably divine-powered if anything, since they tended to be strongly associated with a deity and church.)

Kurald Galain
2009-05-11, 09:11 AM
You're not the only one... I think most of us are surprised.
Actually, I'm not surprised at all. I've been saying for a long time that there is no meaningful distinction between "ki" and "psionic" (and for that matter, between "elemental" and either primal or arcane). After all, psionic is just a western word for chi - both are focused internal energy. Also, I agree with Tengu that it's really irrelevant what power source a class has.

This means a few changes in the expected class lineup, though. Probably ninja and samurai no longer aren't being considered as classes any more.

Anyway, I find the combined discipline bit to be gimmicky and inelegant. It strikes me (heh) that the monk "unarmed strike" is exactly equal to a weapon in every way, which means that from a crunch perspective, he's no longer fighting unarmed.

And, as somebody on the Gleemax forums pointed out, monks are again not listed as proficient with unarmed strikes :smallbiggrin:

Behold_the_Void
2009-05-11, 09:37 AM
At first I was thinking Martial may have been more appropriate, but as a huge psionics fan and when thinking of them more thematically, it really does fit pretty well. I also like their resolution to not just make "ki" a power source and have all the Asian-inspired classes go there, the reasoning is sound and it makes said classes harder to consider total outsiders.

Asbestos
2009-05-11, 09:38 AM
Anyway, I find the combined discipline bit to be gimmicky and inelegant. It strikes me (heh) that the monk "unarmed strike" is exactly equal to a weapon in every way, which means that from a crunch perspective, he's no longer fighting unarmed.

And, as somebody on the Gleemax forums pointed out, monks are again not listed as proficient with unarmed strikes :smallbiggrin:

Well, isn't that the point with monks? When they are 'unarmed' they really aren't. It does mean that the monk will never find his ideal magic weapon in a parcel though, he'll need someone with transfer enchantment at the minimum in order to magicfy his body.

Everyone is 'proficient' with unarmed strikes so there'd be no point at all to listing that.

Artanis
2009-05-11, 10:24 AM
And, as somebody on the Gleemax forums pointed out, monks are again not listed as proficient with unarmed strikes :smallbiggrin:
I imagine this is the sort of thing that a playtest is for :smallwink:

Oslecamo
2009-05-11, 10:32 AM
After all, psionic is just a western word for chi - both are focused internal energy.

No it isn't. Psionic comes only from the mind. Chi comes from the whole body. It's a pretty big diference.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-11, 11:10 AM
No it isn't. Psionic comes only from the mind. Chi comes from the whole body. It's a pretty big diference.

Nevermind that the mind/body dichotomy is a false dilemma (in that they are inseparable; it's like firmware and hardware, at the least), that's a bizarre definition of both. Ki is energy, and it's found inside people. Psi is, presumably, energy since it can affect things. Kung-fu fantasy ki-use (the relevant kind) is definitely a mental discipline first; but psi is not an exclusively mental pursuit.

If you want D&D points of reference, Dark Sun psionics were very much like yogi and ki-users; they trained their bodies rigorously and subjected themselves to physical hardship to hone their mental prowess.

Other fantasy examples spring to mind. In Fading Suns, psionics very explicitly explain ki and prana - in fact, prana-bindu is a psionic technique.

Seriously, ki and psionics are indistinguishable within D&D.

And this is still completely irrelevant, because monks were never "powered by ki" to begin with, except in the minds of players who liked that idea.

Awesomologist
2009-05-11, 02:03 PM
After reading the article through a couple of times I'm not that impressed by the monk class. Granted it's only one build and a play test. It is yet another Striker/Controller, able to spread damage and effects (prone, dazed, weakened, ongoing damage, etc) amongst multiple targets within reach.

It has a gimmicky power structure, Full Discipline, which actually looks more limiting since it ties your move and standard actions together. The only way to break out of that is by spending an action point. The article does a horrific job of explicitly stating how it works although I think over the course of the last 12 hours or so most people have figured it out.

Damage wise they're on par with Rogues (although the Rogue can out burst it), Warlocks, and maybe Avengers (Monks look like they might be able to out damage in a single round, but they won't beat the Avenger over the course of several rounds). They appear to lag behind Rangers, Barbarians, and Sorcerers. Their control effects are more in line with Warlocks, with a dash of Sorcerer bursts. A quick glance doesn't show any ranged attacks but they do have proficiency with daggers, shuriken, and slings.

They have a decent starting HP but it doesn't scale up well (Con is not one of their stats). Their AC looks about average, and will scale so (You can safely assume there will be a feat that will scale their AC so plan on it). It's unfortunate though because it looks like Monks want to be inside thick groups of enemies, but you're actually penalized for trading up for leather armor (you lose you class AC feature). NAD's are average, maybe slightly higher over all but nothing to write home about.

I guess it's their movement powers (which are tied to standard actions) that are suppose to impress us but they don't seem to do much more that any Rogue, Ranger, or Barbarian can't do. It's more like they combined the Rogue's and Ranger's shifting abilities with the jumping and athleticism of the Barbarian. They combine those with average damage and control.

Without having played one, they read like a Rogue with an at-will cleave they can add to their successful attacks. They're even able to train Thievery :smallconfused: ? I guess when you've trained long and hard to grab the pea from your master's hand you're automatically good picking locks and disarming traps.

Problem with this class in my opinion, is that it feels like it's all fluff. They could have made a new Rogue in Martial Power 2 do all the same things this Monk can do. There are no striker features that make it feel original or exciting. Barbarians have rages, Rogues have Sneak Attack, Avengers have their Oath, Warlocks have their pact. Monks just have two of their actions tied together.

All that being said it doesn't appear to be a bad class. It looks fairly balanced (although I'm sure someone will break it). I think the fun stuff will come from multi-classing. Rogues and Fighters will love to multi-class into Monk since power swap feats essentially give you a Move Action power and Standard Action power for the cost of one.

Mando Knight
2009-05-11, 02:08 PM
I suppose that no-one will be taking any bets as to whether 4E monks will have a Surge Fist (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KamehameHadoken)-type power, then? :smalltongue:

BobTheDog
2009-05-11, 03:15 PM
They have a decent starting HP but it doesn't scale up well (Con is not one of their stats).

Excuse me, but... How does having a low Con impact the HP scaling up well? Sure, it affects your starting HP, but your HP per level are fixed.

skywalker
2009-05-11, 03:25 PM
I can see why they made it so monks can use 'enchant item' to enchant their unarmed attacks (so monks don't get free magic weapons/monks can actually have non-suck magic weapons) but it presents some silliness. For instance having your MUS be a Frost Weapon and headbutting (an example given in the description of MUS) someone with the Frost Weapon Daily... talk about brain freeze.

That's really only for the Scottish monks, you see...


Actually, I'm not surprised at all. I've been saying for a long time that there is no meaningful distinction between "ki" and "psionic" (and for that matter, between "elemental" and either primal or arcane). After all, psionic is just a western word for chi - both are focused internal energy. Also, I agree with Tengu that it's really irrelevant what power source a class has.

I said most, not all... :smalltongue:


This means a few changes in the expected class lineup, though. Probably ninja and samurai no longer aren't being considered as classes any more.

I always thought that the 4e ninja would draw his power from the shadow power source.


And, as somebody on the Gleemax forums pointed out, monks are again not listed as proficient with unarmed strikes :smallbiggrin:

I think it's a big joke by Wizards. I really do. There's no way they could possibly screw up something that important twice.


Well, isn't that the point with monks? When they are 'unarmed' they really aren't. It does mean that the monk will never find his ideal magic weapon in a parcel though, he'll need someone with transfer enchantment at the minimum in order to magicfy his body.

You could make a magic item (Wizards may already be doing so) that puts an enchantment on a monk. Or you know, there are other cool ways, such as:

"When you deliver the killing blow to the ancient white dragon, you feel a great chill in your fist. As the chill spreads throughout your body, you feel a new power coursing through your veins."

IMO, sounds much cooler than: "You find a +5 frost longsword, the cleric can transfer the +5 frost to your fist."

Awesomologist
2009-05-11, 03:39 PM
Excuse me, but... How does having a low Con impact the HP scaling up well? Sure, it affects your starting HP, but your HP per level are fixed.

I just meant that the Monk's HP will never move up more from there compared to the Barbarian (+6 per level, +Con increases) or the Avenger (+6 per level). Over time both those classes will pull away and they both have better means of improving their AC.
Rogues and Rangers also have better options for improving their AC.

The Monk so far looks like its better at Heroic but begins to be outclassed by Paragon and Epic. This is of course due to a lack of feats and other options. Thats expected, it's only a play test. I'm just trying to warn folks not to go rushing home to make your monk and expect to be able to jump into a level 16 adventure as well as other strikers.

Tiki Snakes
2009-05-11, 04:32 PM
I just meant that the Monk's HP will never move up more from there compared to the Barbarian (+6 per level, +Con increases) or the Avenger (+6 per level). Over time both those classes will pull away and they both have better means of improving their AC.
Rogues and Rangers also have better options for improving their AC.

The Monk so far looks like its better at Heroic but begins to be outclassed by Paragon and Epic. This is of course due to a lack of feats and other options. Thats expected, it's only a play test. I'm just trying to warn folks not to go rushing home to make your monk and expect to be able to jump into a level 16 adventure as well as other strikers.

Considering you don't need to waste a feat on leather armour, (as your class AC bonus when not wearing it is Equal to the bonus you get from wearing it), you can instead take toughness perhaps? That'll take a decent chunk out of the Avenger or Barbarian's lead. Seriously, though, I'm not sure I'm buying all these dire warnings of imminent monk suckitude. It seems pretty solid to me, and furthermore, has plenty to differentiate it from other strikers.

And let's face it, given the state they were in, previously, who's really going to be expecting to roll up a monk and have it be a towering juggernaut of power? :P

Arbitrarity
2009-05-11, 04:40 PM
Unarmed Strike needs some unique feats. Just like Hammer Rhythm and Heavy Blade Opportunity help define fighters and other heavy weapon users, monk weapon choice should be relevant.

Also, it has difficulty qualifying for a variety of weapon enhancements (no Berserker fists), which seems like a serious weakness for the monk.

Awesomologist
2009-05-11, 04:50 PM
Considering you don't need to waste a feat on leather armour, (as your class AC bonus when not wearing it is Equal to the bonus you get from wearing it), you can instead take toughness perhaps? That'll take a decent chunk out of the Avenger or Barbarian's lead. Seriously, though, I'm not sure I'm buying all these dire warnings of imminent monk suckitude. It seems pretty solid to me, and furthermore, has plenty to differentiate it from other strikers.

I don't know of any melee striker build that doesn't include toughness. It's a feat anyone can take, and one that both Avenger and Barbarians will take. Even dragon sorcerers should be looking at toughness.

I'm not saying the Monk sucks. It's a pretty balanced, as I said in my longer post. They do decent damage, enough to qualify as a striker, and posses high mobility, also a striker trait. Flurry of Blows (which I failed to mention in my previous post) allows you to either focus your damage on one target or spread it around, which is on par with other striker damage features, with the potential for minion control.

In my opinion, and it's just an opinion, the monk isn't impressive. When I first saw the Barbarian I said "Wow!" when i saw it's raw damage potential. When I saw the Avenger I said "Wow!" when I saw how accurate it could be and it's potential for crits. The monk just doesn't impress me the way other strikers have since they don't really have a mechanic that is unique to the class. Maybe the other monk builds may have more to them, but at this point I don't see the monk bringing anything to the table that other classes don't already bring, except perhaps by way of fluff.

Actually in further reading the class and reading others post, I wonder why the Monk wasn't the choice for the Martial Controller.

Tiki Snakes
2009-05-11, 05:21 PM
Yeah, it does lack a unique mechanic. Except for that, you know... unique mechanic it has.... >_>

Personally though, I'm mainly digging it for it's flexibility. All you have to do, really, is stick to one handed or versatile weapons and you can basically play with any crazy equipment theme you like and still use your nifty monk shenanigans. Stuff like that. I see it as a class with genuinely flexible role-playing applications, and quite possibly a great class to use for multi-classing. (Depending on the eventual multi-class feats in question, and what they give, probably by starting AS the monk, rather than classing INTO the monk, but we'll see.)

On some levels, I do agree though. If simply being a monster in combat is your thing, this is unlikely to end up as the class for you, because the slight control element will mean you aren't going to get so much pure damage, if nothing else. But this is in many other respects, a very good class.

Awesomologist
2009-05-11, 05:33 PM
Yeah, it does lack a unique mechanic. Except for that, you know... unique mechanic it has.... >_>
What unique mechanic? Flurry of Blows? You're either adding damage to your main attack, something most strikers do already, or you're spreading it out, something sorcerers and warlocks can do in their own way. It's not unique.


I see it as a class with genuinely flexible role-playing applications, and quite possibly a great class to use for multi-classing. (Depending on the eventual multi-class feats in question, and what they give, probably by starting AS the monk, rather than classing INTO the monk, but we'll see.)
Now this I can totally agree with. I actually think that rogue players will love multi-classing into monk and picking up some shift and strike powers, something that will really work their own class mechanics. I don't see much benefit in starting out as a monk (at this point, which I will admit is waaaaaaay too early to tell how the class will end up).


On some levels, I do agree though. If simply being a monster in combat is your thing, this is unlikely to end up as the class for you, because the slight control element will mean you aren't going to get so much pure damage, if nothing else. But this is in many other respects, a very good class.
Look down at my signature. I'm a big fan of Avengers, and I like their control effects. The wow factor, for me, isn't all about damage.

Colmarr
2009-05-11, 06:07 PM
According to design and development, Ki power source has been offed.

Is it completely pessimistic of me to see this as a sign of Dancey death spiral; that by trimming power sources WotC is trimming development costs?

Reverent-One
2009-05-11, 06:36 PM
Is it completely pessimistic of me to see this as a sign of Dancey death spiral; that by trimming power sources WotC is trimming development costs?

Yes, considering that the classes in the Ki power source are not ceasing to exist, but changing power sources or becoming a template for another class, thus they still will have a development cost.

Tiki Snakes
2009-05-11, 06:51 PM
What unique mechanic? Flurry of Blows? You're either adding damage to your main attack, something most strikers do already, or you're spreading it out, something sorcerers and warlocks can do in their own way. It's not unique.

The New Mechanic being Full Discipline, an entirely new mechanic that links your attacks to special forms of movement? Practically giving you a free utility power with every attack.

(Also I noticed with glee that somewhere around level 10, 11, they have the chance to pick up an at-will spider-climb style move-utility. god, I love getting extra at will powers.)

holywhippet
2009-05-11, 06:57 PM
Is it completely pessimistic of me to see this as a sign of Dancey death spiral; that by trimming power sources WotC is trimming development costs?

From what I've seen, power sources are mostly just fluff. I can't think of anything offhand that says "you must have X power source to use this". I haven't studied the books cover to cover admittedly.

Tiki Snakes
2009-05-11, 07:02 PM
From what I've seen, power sources are mostly just fluff. I can't think of anything offhand that says "you must have X power source to use this". I haven't studied the books cover to cover admittedly.

There are a lot of things tied to the martial power-source (especially in Dragon Magazine), but then, they do all have a very martial flavour. (Usually the special weapon-training feats, giving you special powers for and new ways of using certain exotic weapons, such as the whip and spiked chain, bola, and net.)

That said, they are usually so theme specific that it really doesn't seem utterly prohibitive to just take a multi-class feat to make you a martial class in the first place. My only problem with this is finding a worth-while martial multiclass. (I tend to favour things like most of the arcane multiclasses, which give you a set skill as trained and usually a trick or encounter power AS WELL, rather than something like the fighters 'pick a skill' and get a 1/encounter +1 to hit, maybe.)

Colmarr
2009-05-11, 07:04 PM
Yes, considering that the classes in the Ki power source are not ceasing to exist, but changing power sources or becoming a template for another class, thus they still will have a development cost.

Except that so far the only Ki class we definitely know about (AFAIK) is the monk, and it's possible that it was so far along in development that they didn't want to abandon it.

Nevertheless, perhaps it was completely pessimistic of me :smallwink:

Bassetking
2009-05-11, 07:15 PM
The New Mechanic being Full Discipline, an entirely new mechanic that links your attacks to special forms of movement? Practically giving you a free utility power with every attack.

(Also I noticed with glee that somewhere around level 10, 11, they have the chance to pick up an at-will spider-climb style move-utility. god, I love getting extra at will powers.)

An entirely new mechanic that requires the 4e equivalent of a 3.5 Full Action to accomplish.

You can either:
1) Use your special shiny class ability. It counts as both your move action and your attack action.

2) Move, and Attack.

"But Basset, you long absent stalwart!" I hear you crying; "You are trading your move action for utility powers based off of your attack action!"

An excellent point! Were there not already attacks that performed the same end-result, while still providing the character his move action! Kings Castle, Trick Strike, Bait And Switch...

It again, in a further edition, forces the Monk to choose between making use of his move action, arguably even more vital in 4e, and making use of his class features.

Reverent-One
2009-05-11, 07:42 PM
Except that so far the only Ki class we definitely know about (AFAIK) is the monk, and it's possible that it was so far along in development that they didn't want to abandon it.

The quote about how they found that classes like the Ninja, shugenja, ect fit into other power sources very much implies that they're still working on the classes.


An entirely new mechanic that requires the 4e equivalent of a 3.5 Full Action to accomplish.

You can either:
1) Use your special shiny class ability. It counts as both your move action and your attack action.

2) Move, and Attack.

No, you can also use either the move or the attack portion of a Full discipline power, it's not an all or nothing proposition. If you want to use Dragon's Tail attack portion, but need to move your full speed to get into position, you can move, then attack with Dragon's tail. If you want to use one of the move portions of an at-will, or even an encounter, full-discipline power and then use one of your daily attacks, you can do that too. You don't have to give up a move to do the attack.

TheEmerged
2009-05-11, 07:48 PM
RE: Monk as Psionic. You mean they finally acknowledged it :smallbiggrin: ? It makes a LOT of sense, actually, and it's amusing to see the similarities and differences between what I'm seeing and my own psionic striker idea (I had several powers for my soulknife that used both the move & standard action, or the minor & standard, and so on).

This also makes it likely we'll be seeing the rest of the psionic material earlier than I feared, which I don't mind. My psionic project has been an interesting experiment with other ways to handle the new power/action system, but I'd really rather work with their material :smallredface:

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-11, 07:52 PM
A one- or two-class power source would be silly. Monks and maybe ninjas? Shugenja and wu-jen are pretty clearly elemental, or arcane and divine.

holywhippet
2009-05-11, 08:34 PM
There are a lot of things tied to the martial power-source (especially in Dragon Magazine), but then, they do all have a very martial flavour. (Usually the special weapon-training feats, giving you special powers for and new ways of using certain exotic weapons, such as the whip and spiked chain, bola, and net.)


Is Dragon magazine worth getting? I generally just buy the source books. Do the stuff in the magazines ever make it into books?

Tiki Snakes
2009-05-11, 08:43 PM
Is Dragon magazine worth getting? I generally just buy the source books. Do the stuff in the magazines ever make it into books?

Well, I don't know about back in the magazine proper days, however, now I'd say Yes.

On account of what you actually get is the dnd insider subscription;
Dragon Magazine AND Dungeon Magazine (downloadable pdf's of all the online ones so far, as far as I can tell) as well as the excellent Character Builder and the Compendium (which has every item, feat, race, etc etc etc from 4th ed and is updated quite well.) and in theory some other toys, (mostly useful for dm's) as well as anything they come up with in the months and years to come, really.

Or just do the 1 month subscription, download all of the above bar the compendium, and don't renew. AFAIK you get to keep it all. (The Character Builder just wouldn't update with essentially free stuff after the subscription ended.

RTGoodman
2009-05-11, 10:58 PM
Is Dragon magazine worth getting? I generally just buy the source books. Do the stuff in the magazines ever make it into books?

Heck yeah it is. I mean, 24 magazines a year alone is worth it, and the Character Builder and Compendium and other Tools are all excellent, too.

Some of the stuff WILL make it to print (there's a Dragon Magazine Annual Compilation 2009 or something like that coming out in August, I think), but not all of it, and as one of the designers said in a recent article, don't forget that EVERYTHING in the 'zines is official, Core material. And most of it is really cool (especially the race entries, several multiclass-only classes, a bunch of planar PPs, and stuff like that).

Even if you get the one-month it's worth that price, but I've not regretted getting the longer subscription yet.

Asbestos
2009-05-12, 12:02 AM
I think it's a big joke by Wizards. I really do. There's no way they could possibly screw up something that important twice.

Again... it is NOT important at all. There is no reason to include 'unarmed strike' in the monk's list of weapon profs. Everyone can use unarmed strike as an improvised attack, everyone is 'proficient' with it, but for monks it is explicitly stated that instead of doing that they can use the Monk's Unarmed Strike. The big typo is that the MUS isn't listed as a 'monk weapon' but rather 'unarmed strike' is.

@Awesomeologist

Concern about the AC 'not scaling':
Monk AC= Rogue AC, they scale exactly the same. The rogue starts with leather armor (+2 AC) and the monk starts with a +2 bonus to AC, as well both classes use Dex as their primary stat.

On HP not scaling:
It is the same as any other striker that doesn't 'require' Con. Notably Fey and Darklocks, Rogues, Avengers, Rangers, and Sorcerers.

On Monk's having Thievery: This is nothing new, back in AD&D the two classes had pretty much the exact same skills.


Edit: Kobold Monk=Stealthiest/most mobile monk ever?

Jokes
2009-05-12, 12:15 AM
On Monk's having Thievery: This is nothing new, back in AD&D the two classes had pretty much the exact same skills.

But they don't have religion... Huh? :smallconfused: There is even a paragon path with religion as a requirement, but you have to blow a feat on it to qualify?

skywalker
2009-05-12, 12:19 AM
Is Dragon magazine worth getting? I generally just buy the source books. Do the stuff in the magazines ever make it into books?

The stuff in the magazines does not get into the book. But they push much harder for it to be... "official." They do put the stuff in the character builder, and I think it's supposed to make it more... accepted.

Asbestos
2009-05-12, 12:44 AM
But they don't have religion... Huh? :smallconfused: There is even a paragon path with religion as a requirement, but you have to blow a feat on it to qualify?

Oh, I absolutely agree. They need some sort of knowledge feat.

I kind of hope that the PHB3 doesn't introduce autohypnosis as another skill but that rather something similar comes back as a feature or feat.

Colmarr
2009-05-12, 12:55 AM
Monk AC= Rogue AC, they scale exactly the same. The rogue starts with leather armor (+2 AC) and the monk starts with a +2 bonus to AC, as well both classes use Dex as their primary stat.

Except that the Monk's +2 AC bonus doesn't become masterwork at level 6+*.

Fortunately, this is saved by the fact that monks can wear cloth, which does become masterwork. So a monk wearing cloth scales AC like anyone else. A monk who chooses to go armourless will fall behind the AC curve.

*the first level at which masterwork armour becomes available.

RTGoodman
2009-05-12, 01:23 AM
But they don't have religion... Huh? :smallconfused: There is even a paragon path with religion as a requirement, but you have to blow a feat on it to qualify?

Yeah, but it's not necessarily a Skill Training feat. You get Religion as an automatic trained skill or as a choice with every Divine class's Multiclass feat (unless I'm mistaken), and with a high Wis as a Monk there's a good chance you just might take one of those anyway.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-12, 09:22 AM
Fortunately, this is saved by the fact that monks can wear cloth, which does become masterwork. So a monk wearing cloth scales AC like anyone else. A monk who chooses to go armourless will fall behind the AC curve.


Seeing that no cloth = naked, I'd say this is good. We don't want to promote indecent behaviours.

Yakk
2009-05-12, 10:16 AM
... and as one of the designers said in a recent article, don't forget that EVERYTHING in the 'zines is official, Core material. And most of it is really cool (especially the race entries, several multiclass-only classes, a bunch of planar PPs, and stuff like that).They can call it core, but they cannot make me drink.

Awesomologist
2009-05-12, 12:13 PM
Concern about the AC 'not scaling':
Monk AC= Rogue AC, they scale exactly the same. The rogue starts with leather armor (+2 AC) and the monk starts with a +2 bonus to AC, as well both classes use Dex as their primary stat.
Rogue players know that sitting in melee is a bad idea, which is why the class is designed to work with cover and concealment mechanics (Warlocks as well). They also have plenty of powers and a class features which works with ranged attacks, and the Artful Dodger's AC bonus vs Opportunity Attacks (even more if you're a halfling!). Who cares if the Rogue's AC isn't that high when they're sniping with their crossbow from behind cover? The Rogue is setup so that he a multitude of ways of increasing his AC temporarily without having to expend powers to do so.
The monk does have utilities and several of the Full Disciplines that grant bonuses but now you're expending powers to do the same thing a rogue can do for free. Also the monk will likely be right in the middle of things. If fits the class, and thats great but they're going to need a bigger a boost is all I'm saying.



On HP not scaling:
It is the same as any other striker that doesn't 'require' Con. Notably Fey and Darklocks, Rogues, Avengers, Rangers, and Sorcerers.
There is no reason why an Avenger shouldn't start with at least a 14 Con unless the player will be multi-classing heavily into Fighter or Ranger, or wasting points trying to pick up heavy blade feats.
Warlocks also have defensive mechanics to aid them. Fey Pact has teleports, Dark Pact has Dark Spiral Aura (also great at ranged). Star, Infernal, and now Vestige all work with con. Infernal is exceptionally well suited for survival.
While rangers don't always have a high con they can move up to scale armor easily by Paragon, and rogues can easily jump to hide.
Sorcerers that are on or near the front line have plenty of damage shield effects that punish those that hit them. So even if they don't have a high HP/Con scaling, there are plenty of reasons not to hit them. The ranged versions are supposed to be glass cannons though.



On Monk's having Thievery: This is nothing new, back in AD&D the two classes had pretty much the exact same skills.

We never played with the monk back in AD&D since, if I'm not mistaken, it was just a cleric kit. if there was a monk class, we never played with it. My budget for books wasn't very big when I was 11 :smalltongue:
Never played 3e, which I'm starting to think was a good thing...

I'm not saying that thievery can't be an option, but I think it's stepping on the toes of what the rogue does. Granted thievery does cover a lot of ground, not just picking pockets and locks.

Project_Mayhem
2009-05-18, 10:33 AM
We never played with the monk back in AD&D since, if I'm not mistaken, it was just a cleric kit. if there was a monk class, we never played with it. My budget for books wasn't very big when I was 11

I'm pretty sure the monk was a full class back in 1ed. Fun abilities, but I get the impression from the Grognards on the forum that it was a bit sucky

Blackfang108
2009-05-18, 01:53 PM
But they don't have religion... Huh? :smallconfused: There is even a paragon path with religion as a requirement, but you have to blow a feat on it to qualify?

Or be an Eladrin. Remember, that extra skill doesn't have to be a class skill.

And Dex is one of their stat bumps.

Asbestos
2009-05-19, 09:16 AM
We never played with the monk back in AD&D since, if I'm not mistaken, it was just a cleric kit. if there was a monk class, we never played with it. My budget for books wasn't very big when I was 11 :smalltongue:
Never played 3e, which I'm starting to think was a good thing...

It was way more than a kit, the kits wouldn't modify something so much as to completely strip away a class's casting, armor profs, weapon profs, and give different class features on top of that.

Awesomologist
2009-05-19, 10:42 AM
It was way more than a kit, the kits wouldn't modify something so much as to completely strip away a class's casting, armor profs, weapon profs, and give different class features on top of that.

I honestly don't remember. It's been 10 years since I've played AD&D. That being said I don't think the monk ever came up around our table anyways.

Frenchy147
2010-10-20, 04:48 PM
I currently play a lvl 8 bard, which is nice because i have 16 diplomacy +2 for i forget what, and a utility that gives +5, so i can have +23. My party loves it. I still want to at least try a monk. I'm thinking about making my bard 'retire' somewhere around paragon to mid-paragon.

oops i forgot why i was posting :smallbiggrin: i was thinking about replacing him with a elf centered breath monk.

Frenchy147
2010-10-20, 04:52 PM
I honestly don't remember. It's been 10 years since I've played AD&D. That being said I don't think the monk ever came up around our table anyways.

Oh, and also i was going to say i never understood kits.

Flarowon
2010-10-20, 05:21 PM
So far, my experience with 4e monks is:

1) They can jump like the bejeezus,
and
2) Your DM will hate you, because they'll never be able to use minions ever again. Seriously, monks will wreck minions.


That's about it for what I know of them.

Aron Times
2010-10-20, 05:43 PM
Looks like a wizard cast Animate Dead on this thread.

WitchSlayer
2010-10-20, 06:16 PM
Looks like a wizard cast Animate Dead on this thread.

After this much decay, I'd think it'd need...

*Sunglasses*

Resurrection

YYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH

Katana_Geldar
2010-10-20, 10:21 PM
The monk in my ToH group is the primary damage dealer, he did so much damage to this plant that I changed my mind to have the Consume Soul power on him rather than the wizard.

But then he had to be bailed out as I tied him up in vines and kept poisoning him. :smallamused:

Zeb The Troll
2010-10-21, 12:48 AM
Troll Patrol: Thread closed. It's well past its expiration date.