PDA

View Full Version : and what IS a monk?



krossbow
2009-11-09, 09:15 PM
"What is a monk? Nothing but a miserable little pile of secrets!"

seriously though, castlevania reference aside, what exactly IS monk anyways? One of the big issues with monks in 3.5 was the fact that none of their abilities really synergized; but what really defined what a monk SHOULD be?



Is a monk supposed to be speedy? or about enlightenment and spiritualism? Are they about getting down and dirty in a fight, or about being acrobatic?


what abilities do you think a monk would need to maintain its "monkishness", and what do you think is fluff? should they shoot ki attacks like dbz, or be more natural, realistic brawlers/punchers? should they run up walls or anything supernatural? should they even be forced to fight unarmed at all?

Tavar
2009-11-09, 09:26 PM
When I think of the monk, I think of the swordsage. I mean, really, it has the flashy stuff, the subtle stuff, the hitting a person so hard his heart explodes, the nimble stuff, the the learned man stuff. What more do you really want from a monk. Seriously, what do you think is critical to the flavor of a monk that a swordsage lacks?

infinitypanda
2009-11-09, 09:31 PM
When I think of the monk I think of a scholar in an itchy brown robe copying down Aristotle and the Bible word by word. And occasionally getting killed by Vikings or, if he's an Italian monk, going off and fathering a few dozen illegitimate children.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-09, 09:33 PM
Yes, but the requirements of adventuring cause the archivist to diverge from the true monk archetype. What adjustments could be made to the archivist to bring it closer to the feel of a monk? Focus more on the spirituality, mayhap?

Tavar
2009-11-09, 09:36 PM
Well, first I guess we should define the style of monk: the archivist version has two good representations in dnd already: Archivist or Cloistered Cleric. The Eastern monk, however, lacks a good definition. Given the topic of this thread is the Monk class, I'd assume that we're talking about the latter rather than the former.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-09, 09:37 PM
When I think of the monk I think of a scholar in an itchy brown robe copying down Aristotle and the Bible word by word. And occasionally getting killed by Vikings or, if he's an Italian monk, going off and fathering a few dozen illegitimate children.

I don't think so, Tim.

infinitypanda
2009-11-09, 09:39 PM
Yes, the cloistered cleric covers the Western monk about as well as is possible.

The Eastern monk needs to be fast, good at dodging, and able to hit hard. Pulling off amazing acrobatics is also a plus. So almost like a rogue/fighter hybrid, really, but a lot flashier and almost to the supernatural level.

arguskos
2009-11-09, 09:40 PM
Speaking of Pharaoh, here's the MONK OF AGES (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6404306&postcount=47)! Only the beard can save us all from the coming apocalypse!

Glyde
2009-11-09, 09:42 PM
Mobile solo combat character that is decent at locking down single enemies in campaigns that aren't filled with batman wizards, chain fighters or CoDzillas.

nhbdy
2009-11-09, 09:43 PM
when I think monk, it needs to synergize it's speed and martial arts and acrobatics so you would have a spring attack type fighter except that he would likely hit multiple enemies in one turn (jumping from enemy to enemy)

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-09, 09:47 PM
I don't think so, Tim.

Didn't we do this one already? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7279391#post7279391)

ondonaflash
2009-11-09, 09:50 PM
You know, I think we should broaden our monastic horizons a bit, rather than just the "Western Biblical Scholar With Tonsure" Monk, and the "Eastern, this could eitehr be a Buddhist or Shaolin Monk" What about the Eastern Orthodoxy (http://www.sacredsites.com/europe/greece/images/monk-st-john-500.jpg)? Just tell me that dude doesn't look like he could put a hurtin' on a fool. Diablo 3 drew some inspiration from them as well (http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/monk.xml?rhtml=y), though they also pulled from some of the eastern cultures.

Captain Six
2009-11-09, 09:53 PM
The monk shines in situations no one can predict. I'm not talking about being merely caught off guard, I mean when really weird stuff starts to go down. The monk is built to survive and thrive and it probably can better than any other class when it comes to the unexpected. I know someone will bring up how X class can do better but then hypothetical situations cannot be unexpected by definition.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-09, 09:56 PM
The monk shines in situations no one can predict. I'm not talking about being merely caught off guard, I mean when really weird stuff starts to go down. The monk is built to survive and thrive and it probably can better than any other class when it comes to the unexpected. I know someone will bring up how X class can do better but then hypothetical situations cannot be unexpected by definition.

So it doesn't die when something weird happens. Problem is, last time I checked, you don't accomplish many goals in DnD simply by not dying.

Incidentally, the monk in The Monkening has died quite a bit so far, in the weird and varied situations we have gone through.

chiasaur11
2009-11-09, 09:58 PM
You know, I think we should broaden our monastic horizons a bit, rather than just the "Western Biblical Scholar With Tonsure" Monk, and the "Eastern, this could eitehr be a Buddhist or Shaolin Monk" What about the Eastern Orthodoxy (http://www.sacredsites.com/europe/greece/images/monk-st-john-500.jpg)? Just tell me that dude doesn't look like he could put a hurtin' on a fool. Diablo 3 drew some inspiration from them as well (http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/monk.xml?rhtml=y), though they also pulled from some of the eastern cultures.

Well, if we include heretical Eastern Orthodox monks, they gain regen and damage resistance something fierce.

Drowning, however, is as much of a problem for them as anyone.

Duke of URL
2009-11-09, 10:04 PM
What the class was supposed to be designed to be is a mage-killer. The mobility, high saves, spell resistance, and Fort-targeting effects are supposed to let the Monk avoid or move through the main combat zone and take out the back-liners, specifically the arcanists.

As a "combat" character, it's supposed to provide a little offensive support, ideally setting up flanking for the heavier hitters.

Problem is, it doesn't do any of it very well.

Demons_eye
2009-11-09, 10:11 PM
I see the monks like I see the boogieman ever changing and scary to meet if he is after you. Both are spouse to get in unseen or plain scare the piss out of you. Both are hard if not impossible to pin down to one archetype and I would love to see both at my next birthday party.

infinitypanda
2009-11-09, 10:12 PM
I think a monk is someone who uses his truly important class features to dominate the battlefield: wands and the Leadership feat.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-11-09, 10:18 PM
Duke of URL has the right of it. Whenever new players look at the class, they see a "caster killer". Given that the folks at WotC are about as knowledgeable about the game as new players, I'd feel fairly confidant that such a role was the original intent. Dash in with a stunning blow, then flurry the hades out of the defenseless sod the next turn in order to finish them. Great concept, ignorant execution. The Diablo III monk looks to be what the 3.5 one was trying to accomplish (and oddly enough, is much like the idea I wrote up to send to Blizzard as a class concept back when Diablo II first came out).

elliott20
2009-11-09, 10:25 PM
based on some of the design and aesthetics of the monk in the PHB, it is clear to me that the monk was meant to emulate every kung-fu shaolin monk stereotype you've ever seen. They run fast, jump high, fight unarmed (or with exotic, strange weapons of the orient), are highly resilient as a result of their spiritual component, and can perform feats of amazing agility/strength/etc.

That is, think of every shaolin monk you've ever seen/read about and you're close.

the problem is, it's just plain wrong in how it went about it. Not every eastern monk runs off of walls, leaps off of bamboos, and what have you. Not every one of them even fight unarmed. But in the heads of the designer, they can't divorce the fluff enough to simply say, "a monk is a fighter/cleric or fighter/thief with some ranks in religion". They felt that the archetype is somehow pervasive enough that it deserves it's own class.

I look at that class that resulted, and it almost looks like they started out loading a crap ton of junk onto the class, realized they over did it, and over nerfed it so now it sucks at everything it does.

I find the idea of the "caster killer" being attributed to the monk to be something that is contrived at best. That role is a derivative result of his abilities and what it could potentially be. It is clearly not written into the fluff itself if you read it.

In most cases, there is a consistency and coherence with the other classes. The fighter was a master warrior (whether or not they actually did the job well was another thing all together), the cleric was a warrior of faith, the paladin was a knight in shining armor, the wizard was, well, a wizard. There was no ambiguity in the fluff text how the designers intended the class to be played and used.

The monk was the one to CLEARLY suffer from this problem.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-09, 10:28 PM
based on some of the design and aesthetics of the monk in the PHB, it is clear to me that the monk was meant to emulate every kung-fu shaolin monk stereotype you've ever seen. They run fast, jump high, fight unarmed (or with exotic, strange weapons of the orient), are highly resilient as a result of their spiritual component, and can perform feats of amazing agility/strength/etc.

That is, think of every shaolin monk you've ever seen/read about and you're close.
Including the ones that can talk to animals?

Dimers
2009-11-09, 10:30 PM
I got introduced to "monk" as a fantasy role in 3.x. Between SR, high saves, still mind, slow fall, immunity to disease/poison/aging, evasion, and self-healing, I assumed the class was made to be protected against stuff normal people have to deal with. The level and Wisdom bonuses to AC also lean in that direction, at least in the context of a magicless world where few professional soldiers have better armor than leather (e.g. ours). The monk is outstandinly well-defended by that definition. The martial arts flicks I've seen just cement that impression -- hard to hit, hard to affect with special powers.

Stunning, quivering palm, and the specialized bonus feats indicate a secondary role of the monk was combining status effects with damage. Another secondary role would be movement, represented by unarmored speed, Tumble as a class skill, abundant step, and empty body. Flurry (or the 3.0 equivalent of a different BAB step) and magic-powered fists are merely supposed to keep the class from falling far behind in melee suitability; I don't feel they represent a role themselves.

So that's what I think the monk should be about: good protection against weird stuff, decent melee with status effects, movement. And the monk does all of those just fine (while still having plenty of weak areas to keep it interesting) in a low-magic setting.

MCerberus
2009-11-09, 10:30 PM
Including the ones that can talk to animals?

Gnome monk?

elliott20
2009-11-09, 10:31 PM
Including the ones that can talk to animals?

yes, even that one.

there are literature out there that describes a monk so in tuned with nature and the dao itself that they can converse with everything through understanding the natural order of things.

yeah, I know, it sounds a little silly, but there are there.

Duke of URL
2009-11-09, 10:35 PM
I find the idea of the "caster killer" being attributed to the monk to be something that is contrived at best. That role is a derivative result of his abilities and what it could potentially be. It is clearly not written into the fluff itself if you read it.

Fluff is irrelevant. A class is the sum of its mechanical abilities. Fluff only describes how members of that class fit into the default setting.

elliott20
2009-11-09, 10:38 PM
Fluff is irrelevant. A class is the sum of its mechanical abilities. Fluff only describes how members of that class fit into the default setting.

Yes, fluff can be divorced from the mechanical portions of the class. We all know that sometimes it makes the class work a lot better. But I do not think that the designers intended for the fluff to be THAT easily separated. If they did, it would have been kept intentionally vague and loose like say, the fighter or rogue.

We are, after all, talking about design intent, not result. And we have already seen a track record from the designers with the inability to put two and two together.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-11-09, 10:41 PM
... Again, I'm with URL. One could fluff the Fighter as a master of the arcane, but if the mechanics say otherwise, so too does the reality of the character. While the dev team must have been hitting mind-altering substances pretty hard when they came up with captain wire-fu, the sum of the class' parts strongly indicates a rearguard wrecking intent.

The Tygre
2009-11-09, 10:46 PM
What is a Monk? Well what's you're flavor? My general thoughts immediately say 'an unarmed melee combatant'. The rest is flavor text, in mystical or non-mystical varieties. Perhaps the monk is an oriental battle priest like its flavor text. Maybe he's an initiate into secret arts expressed through his physical motions. She could be a mage-killer, either through breeding, training, or both. Per chance they are street-wise pugilists, growing tougher out in the back alleys of the world. Ninjas? Weapon masters? Gods in embryo? My personal favorite is the Olympian. You don't even need to change him that much, it's merely an adjustment of flavor text. Think about it; a devoted practitioner of the physical, athletic, and unarmed ways. A master of the ancient Coliseum sports; boxing, wrestling, sprinting, vaulting. He grows stronger and tougher as the years pass by until, at last, his competitive prowess is so great that the lofty gods look down from Olympus and deem him an immortal. Let that be a lesson; you never know what you can work into a campaign setting. It's just a matter of elbow grease.

elliott20
2009-11-09, 10:51 PM
... Again, I'm with URL. One could fluff the Fighter as a master of the arcane, but if the mechanics say otherwise, so too does the reality of the character. While the dev team must have been hitting mind-altering substances pretty hard when they came up with captain wire-fu, the sum of the class' parts strongly indicates a rearguard wrecking intent.
I'm not disagreeing with either of you that the class leans towards that in it's final sum. Nor am I disagreeing with you on whether or not fluff SHOULD be tied to mechanics. I'm simply talking about my belief on what the designer intended.

And I'm saying that I do not believe the designers had any intention of making him into the rearguard wrecking squad, and that their entire design was based pretty much on just the "captain wire-fu" portion.

that is, they never even GOT to the part about how this class might actually play out in game.

Captain Six
2009-11-09, 11:03 PM
So it doesn't die when something weird happens. Problem is, last time I checked, you don't accomplish many goals in DnD simply by not dying.

Incidentally, the monk in The Monkening has died quite a bit so far, in the weird and varied situations we have gone through.

You go on to accomplish things if you don't die. You do have a point, I don't deny that, I just think it's a strength not worth shrugging off entirely. I don't think monk is a great class; I think it's strength is survivability in a game that is biased toward damage output over damage soaking. What I see is most people not even acknowledging that.

mabriss lethe
2009-11-09, 11:04 PM
they definitely have the potential mechanics of a backline wrecker, but that potential isn't really supported by the rest of the system/character options. Who knows if that was the designers' intent or not. The execution was....lacking....

deuxhero
2009-11-09, 11:18 PM
But enough talk, have at you!


Anyways, gameplay wise, I picture something like a melee scout, focused on moving and attacking.

Fax Celestis
2009-11-09, 11:24 PM
Mobile solo combat character that is decent at locking down single enemies in campaigns that aren't filled with batman wizards, chain fighters or CoDzillas.

Like this?

taltamir
2009-11-09, 11:44 PM
A monk is a person who shaves their head, takes a vow of celibacy, and spends their days praying in a monastery and copying holy texts...

joking aside, in DnD a monk is a person who uses magic via an energy called Ki, to enhance their own bodies into a theoretically (but not in practice) lethal weapon.

ondonaflash
2009-11-09, 11:45 PM
Duke of URL has the right of it. Whenever new players look at the class, they see a "caster killer". Given that the folks at WotC are about as knowledgeable about the game as new players, I'd feel fairly confidant that such a role was the original intent. Dash in with a stunning blow, then flurry the hades out of the defenseless sod the next turn in order to finish them. Great concept, ignorant execution. The Diablo III monk looks to be what the 3.5 one was trying to accomplish (and oddly enough, is much like the idea I wrote up to send to Blizzard as a class concept back when Diablo II first came out).

Pros don't read write ups, just so they can avoid paying royalties when their ideas converge with one of the many their fans send in. Either that or they force you to waive copyrights when you send them your stuff...

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-11-10, 12:05 AM
Pros don't read write ups, just so they can avoid paying royalties when their ideas converge with one of the many their fans send in. Either that or they force you to waive copyrights when you send them your stuff...

Oh, I know that now, but I was caught up in the zeal of the thing when I first did it. :smalltongue:

Dracomorph
2009-11-10, 12:12 AM
Like this?

Oh, you and your clever, well-assembled homebrew.

rooster
2009-11-10, 12:47 AM
A Monk should be:

A Monk should be a master of will. He should be able to take any punishment and ignore all pain. He should respond to attempts at hypnosis and mind control with a stern glare.

A Monk should be a master of body. He should be the king of acrobats. He should be able to use any object as a weapon, including himself. When he hits somebody, they should remember it for a long time.

A Monk should transcend physics. He should be invisible. He should balance on walls. He should wirefight without the cables. He should deflect arrows with his chest.

...So yeah. Basically a Swordsage with Improved Unarmed Strike, Exotic Weapon Proficiency and a Warblade dip for Weapon Aptitude, Wall of Blades and Iron Heart Surge.

ondonaflash
2009-11-10, 12:58 AM
A monk should be the hero. Unfortunately in this game there are many heroes, and they really shouldn't be outshining one another.

Aron Times
2009-11-10, 01:04 AM
The 4e monk is a psionic striker. It is easily the most mobile class in the game. The monk's unarmed strike can be enchanted like any other weapon, and can be disenchanted and then enchanted with another property if you change your mind.

Thajocoth
2009-11-10, 02:49 AM
A monk is someone who has learned through meditation to focus his/her inner power. They have a mastery over themselves that helps them:
* Endure greater pain
* Have increased flexibility
* Have an iron will
* Put immense force behind their fists
* Move themselves and their fists at great speed

And they don't get this power from any form of magic or deity, nor is this power trained as a series of precise strikes... It's the power of knowing themselves well, and the balance within their own body to manipulate themselves... Channel their Ki...

I don't know exactly what they did in 3.5, but I think they handled it well in 4e. A monk's power source is Psionic, as it comes from within. Their fists have the same stats as longswords, which are one of the best martial 1-handed weapons. When they hit, they deal extra damage (from hitting multiple times [aka flurry of blows]), and that damage doesn't have to be against the same target. Their powers all have both standard and move actions. Using a power lets you use either action or both actions... As many times that round as you have actions for. This makes them directly as mobile as they are powerful.

Prime32
2009-11-10, 05:09 AM
This is what a monk is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ZeD40Rg8A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N2pPrIxboI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2bIueessx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI

ondonaflash
2009-11-10, 05:16 AM
This is what a monk is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ZeD40Rg8A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N2pPrIxboI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2bIueessx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI

The odds of that working... are very near zero.

PinkysBrain
2009-11-10, 05:18 AM
I disagree ... not Kenshiro, but Kwai Chang Caine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTL_p02e10

Prime32
2009-11-10, 05:20 AM
Well, Kenshiro has Stunning Fist, Flurry of Blows ("ATTATTATTATTATTATTAAAAA!!!!"), Quivering Palm ("You are alredy dead")... he probably took that variant which trades the speed bonus for damage reduction though.

For me, the most unique things about the monk are resistances/immunities (through control over their bodily functions and metabolism, which might also allow them to do things like fake death), superhuman senses/awareness (part of which would translate as Improved Uncanny Dodge, which the class doesn't have :smalltongue:), and inflicting unusual status effects through pressure points. You might also be able to add "can make ranged attacks with melee weapons without letting go of the weapon".

Bayar
2009-11-10, 07:08 AM
Monks were designed to fight other monks. Seriously, watch an old karate movie. It takes ages until one of the monks get injured and/or dead.

Plus it looks awesome.

Thorcrest
2009-11-10, 08:47 AM
Having played the monk in 3.5, something most people don't do very well, I became one of the most practical characters in the party, the monk isn't meant to be used as only one thing, the monk alson requires others to work with. Using the Monk's skills, need fair Int for this, you can become a stealthy, multi-purpose character, that is useful in combat, the monk's edge however comes, in combat, from his support of others, he can stun an enemy, leaving him open to death from the heavy hitters, or he can flank, or any number of other things. He also gets very high AC very quickly. This means that he can take the role of main melee, making him a dwarf for the extra Con is nice for this, but should still be supported, also if you have very plain magic items, plain looking that is, he can use them and become much more lethal than many of the other classes. What I enjoyed doing with my monk was giving him nunchaku's and having him disarm all of the enemies in combat in the first round, having high initiative rolls is helpful, then what is a fighter without a sword? a target, a cleric without a mace? med kit that runs out FAST, a rogue without a weapon? A guy that runs a way quickly, A stunned mage? Useless.

Failing that, if you have poor stats it becomes difficult, but still possible, or you can be the guy that follows the Heroes around and writes down their tales, a la Dragon Heart.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-10, 08:49 AM
What I enjoyed doing with my monk was giving him nunchaku's and having him disarm all of the enemies in combat in the first round, having high initiative rolls is helpful, then what is a fighter without a sword? a target, a cleric without a mace? med kit that runs out FAST, a rogue without a weapon? A guy that runs a way quickly, A stunned mage? Useless.

An 8 gp item (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/armor.htm#gauntletLocked) negates your entire strategy. Fighter gets +10 to resist disarm with the gauntlet, +4 from having a two handed weapon, and + Str, which is likely higher than that of the monk's disarm modifier. Much higher, considering that while your nunchaku have +2 to disarm, they are light weapons (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions) and suffer a -4 penalty as well (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#disarm). That's a net modifier of -2 to disarm from the weapon. I do not think that -2+4 from Improved Disarm + Str is going to outdo +10 from the locked gauntlet +4 from wielding a two handed weapon +Str from the fighter, unless you're high level and fighting low level fighters and/or fighters who only wield light weapons, in which case... that says more about high level characters vs lower level ones than anything else.

By the way, the fact that since a cleric can spontaneously cast cure spells means that he likely has spells prepared that are not cure spells. Spells that mete out a divinely inspired death to enemies, for example. Slay Living and Poison come to mind.

So what I conclude from your post is that your monk

1. Has a high disarm modifier, despite the -2 penalty from his weapon. This implies high strength.
2. Has high AC, which implies high Dex and Wis.
3. Has high initiative, which implies either Improved Initiative or high Dex.
4. Is can take to melee, which implies high Con. (Less so if a Dwarf)
5. Has good skills, which implies good Int. (High Int if you're anything other than a human)

This isn't about good stats vs poor stats, this is about 50 point buy vs anything more conventional.

Kalirren
2009-11-10, 08:57 AM
When I think of a "monk", as in the high wuxia context, and actually ask myself how it would be implemented inside a D&D 3.5 context if the monk class did not exist, I'd say straight Psychic warrior, except with full BAB and good saves all around.

That class could use those buffs anyway.

Ormagoden
2009-11-10, 09:02 AM
Didn't we do this one already? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7279391#post7279391)

Oh wow! Another monk post! I told you we all should have gotten that pool going!

Around and around we go! where we stop no one knows!

jamroar
2009-11-10, 09:17 AM
based on some of the design and aesthetics of the monk in the PHB, it is clear to me that the monk was meant to emulate every kung-fu shaolin monk stereotype you've ever seen. They run fast, jump high, fight unarmed (or with exotic, strange weapons of the orient), are highly resilient as a result of their spiritual component, and can perform feats of amazing agility/strength/etc.


I think an egoist/psychic warrior fits that niche much better than the monk as written.

bosssmiley
2009-11-10, 09:57 AM
Is a monk supposed to be speedy? or about enlightenment and spiritualism? Are they about getting down and dirty in a fight, or about being acrobatic?

A D&D monk is a deracinated version of the Shaolin Monk as seen in HK action films and/or the Kung Fu TV series. Add a touch of Monkey magic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iUMWy4hqAg) ("HWAKAAAAH!") for high level D&D and you're good to go. That is all.

(btw, the Kung Fu connection is more grist for the "D&D is a western" mill)

Optimystik
2009-11-10, 09:57 AM
I think an egoist/psychic warrior fits that niche much better than the monk as written.

I agree, I always thought monks and psionics should be combined. Didn't 4E do something like that? It's the whole "power from within" concept they both have in common.

hamishspence
2009-11-10, 09:59 AM
yes- when PHB 3 comes out, I think the Monk will be in there as a Psionic character.

AstralFire
2009-11-10, 10:02 AM
If we could harness the energy in monk threads to power things, GitP's forum costs would be cut in half.

JellyPooga
2009-11-10, 12:09 PM
An 8 gp item (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/armor.htm#gauntletLocked) negates your entire strategy. Fighter gets +10 to resist disarm with the gauntlet, +4 from having a two handed weapon, and + Str, which is likely higher than that of the monk's disarm modifier. Much higher, considering that while your nunchaku have +2 to disarm, they are light weapons (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions) and suffer a -4 penalty as well (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#disarm). That's a net modifier of -2 to disarm from the weapon. I do not think that -2+4 from Improved Disarm + Str is going to outdo +10 from the locked gauntlet +4 from wielding a two handed weapon +Str from the fighter, unless you're high level and fighting low level fighters and/or fighters who only wield light weapons, in which case... that says more about high level characters vs lower level ones than anything else.

Whilst, yes, a locked gauntlet gives a hefty bonus vs. disarm, exactly how many NPCs are going to have them? They're cumbersome insamuch as it takes a full-round action to lock/unlock a weapon and you can't use that hand for anything else. Got your hands locked into a two-handed sword (with the aid of a friend, obviously...can't logically do it alone, though the RAW don't support this supposition)? Then my counter to you is to go through a door and close it behind me or climb a ladder. Even someone with one locked gauntlet is going to struggle with anything but the simplest actions that involve using your hands. Also, they look pretty stupid on anything but plate-mail...simply from an aesthetics point of view few NPCs are going to use them unless they're going around in heavy armour and even then, how many of those are going to take the time to lock their gauntlets in every single fight? If he's surprised, your greatsword wielding guy with locked gauntlets is giving up 2 full-rounds to get his +10 vs. disarm. Unless he's very prepared for the fight (in which case I'd be more worried about whatever magical buffs he has running than about the fact that I can't disarm him easily), he just wouldn't bother.

I'm not saying that a nunchuck-disarm-monkey is neccesarily good at disarming, but I wouldn't poo-poo the idea of a disarmer based on a relatively rare piece of equipment that's even rarer to be seen actually in use.

AstralFire
2009-11-10, 12:13 PM
I optimize (compared to most other regs) about as well as a chicken flies (partially due to lack of interest), and the first thing I did when I played a Fighter, ever, was get a locked gauntlet. This was back when I thought the monk was a total badass, mind, and that druids sucked. That's how bad I was. And even I went for the locked gauntlet - and I was playing a rapier-and-shield dex fighter, because this was 3.0.

All you have to have is one hand locked to avoid a disarm, and though I'm a big fan of using terrain tactics - neither of your strategies for dealing with a locked gauntlet user seem terribly useful (people can climb one-handed, especially someone with Str 16) or often available (are ladders around often?)

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-10, 12:15 PM
Alternatively, the fighter just draws a backup weapon. He got a debuff and lost his weakest iteratives. You used one of your best attacks to disarm him. A questionable trade. And that's if you're successful.

Sinfire Titan
2009-11-10, 01:13 PM
You go on to accomplish things if you don't die. You do have a point, I don't deny that, I just think it's a strength not worth shrugging off entirely. I don't think monk is a great class; I think it's strength is survivability in a game that is biased toward damage output over damage soaking. What I see is most people not even acknowledging that.

The problem isn't that he can live through things, the problem is that the enemy lives too. It doesn't matter how much you can live through if the enemy is still around to dish it out.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-10, 01:24 PM
The problem isn't that he can live through things, the problem is that the enemy lives too. It doesn't matter how much you can live through if the enemy is still around to dish it out.And, and this is important, the monk's allies might not. If there are 4 enemies, 3 of which deal 10 points of damage a turn and have 1 HP, and one of which deals 1 point a turn and has 10 HP, which will the enemy target first? The Monk's survivability doesn't matter if there's no reason for the enemies to target him.

Anonymouswizard
2009-11-10, 02:28 PM
To me a monk feels like a tripitaka/monkey mix from Monkey a fighter with a bit of magic, who can use his good abilities with a weapon, but is inherently a pacifist. They can fly on clouds and summon warriors, but their power is more focused on their fighting.

Starbuck_II
2009-11-10, 02:41 PM
I'm not saying that a nunchuck-disarm-monkey is neccesarily good at disarming, but I wouldn't poo-poo the idea of a disarmer based on a relatively rare piece of equipment that's even rarer to be seen actually in use.

Why just use a Flindbar? It is a MM3 Nunchaku better in everyway...

It grants +2 disarm, one handed, 2d4, 19-20, x2. ach time you threaten a Crit, free disarm (no provoke). Pg 62.
Basically, a better nunchaku. The picture is a nunchaku.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-10, 02:49 PM
Monks aren't proficient with it, unfortunately. Because monks-as-written sort of fail.

krossbow
2009-11-10, 02:49 PM
This is what a monk is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ZeD40Rg8A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N2pPrIxboI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2bIueessx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI


that makes so little sense i literally almost had an aneurism. WTF? kicking a tank to death which somehow causes its controls to start shooting lightning?






on topic though, this isn't about monks sucking; we all know we do, move on. The point is, what specifically defines them. For example, should they be better at attacking on the move than the scout, or do they need speed at all?

Starbuck_II
2009-11-10, 03:31 PM
Monks aren't proficient with it, unfortunately. Because monks-as-written sort of fail.

Ironically, it flavor-wise fits the Monk. It would give the Monk a One-up on Fighter at Disarming.
I'm surprised they didn't give it to him.

Eldariel
2009-11-10, 03:51 PM
Ironically, it flavor-wise fits the Monk. It would give the Monk a One-up on Fighter at Disarming.
I'm surprised they didn't give it to him.

Eh, two-handers are still better at disarming. Spiked Chain in particular, it's the king of Disarming Weapons.

Thane of Fife
2009-11-10, 04:02 PM
A D&D monk is a deracinated version of the Shaolin Monk as seen in HK action films and/or the Kung Fu TV series. Add a touch of Monkey magic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iUMWy4hqAg) ("HWAKAAAAH!") for high level D&D and you're good to go. That is all.

(btw, the Kung Fu connection is more grist for the "D&D is a western" mill)

I agree with this. Though I've heard that apparently Kung-Fu Fighting (the song) is more or less the direct inspiration for the AD&D monk (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=399048).

El Dorado
2009-11-10, 04:09 PM
Another question could be What role do you want the monk to play in your game? Should she be able to alongside a fighter and hold the line? Should she be a skirmisher, hitting and fading, but not necessarily be the equal to a frontline fighter? Define the role and then you can better build your PC.

Rainbownaga
2009-11-10, 05:09 PM
This is what a monk is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ZeD40Rg8A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N2pPrIxboI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2bIueessx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI

IMHO that is what a high level monk should be.

Incidentally, why would a monk focus on disarming when you can just use stunning fist to make them drop their weapon?

Tavar
2009-11-10, 05:18 PM
Stunning fist requires a fort save(often high for melee) and doesn't scale well with level.

krossbow
2009-11-10, 05:23 PM
IMHO that is what a high level monk should be.

Incidentally, why would a monk focus on disarming when you can just use stunning fist to make them drop their weapon?



Why should a monk care that you even HAVE weapons when they can take a tank shell to the face and not be scratched?

Prime32
2009-11-10, 05:37 PM
IMHO that is what a high level monk should be.But wait, I have more! :smallbiggrin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxdn0nIoz_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEX59Wla1c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2MqpFQhbLQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3MVUZUbgKE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftb_HWnykzU

And here's the warforged version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJYqnZIR5iQ)


Why should a monk care that you even HAVE weapons when they can take a tank shell to the face and not be scratched?Or when stabbing them causes you to explode. :smalltongue: (last vid in the first post this happens)

JellyPooga
2009-11-10, 05:57 PM
I optimize (compared to most other regs) about as well as a chicken flies (partially due to lack of interest), and the first thing I did when I played a Fighter, ever, was get a locked gauntlet. This was back when I thought the monk was a total badass, mind, and that druids sucked. That's how bad I was. And even I went for the locked gauntlet - and I was playing a rapier-and-shield dex fighter, because this was 3.0.

All you have to have is one hand locked to avoid a disarm, and though I'm a big fan of using terrain tactics - neither of your strategies for dealing with a locked gauntlet user seem terribly useful (people can climb one-handed, especially someone with Str 16) or often available (are ladders around often?)

Consider that a one-handed fighter is going to want to do something with his off-hand...either wield another weapon or use a shield and his other hand isn't so free as you might think. Even if he does free that hand by leaving a wepaon sheathed while he climbs or opens the door, it's still means he's spending extra time to navigate those obstacles and be combat ready.

You don't address the fact that it takes a full-round action to lock a gauntlet either. If you're a guard sitting in the barracks of a prison (or whatever), you aren't going to have your weapon ready-locked...you'll want it free to play cards, drink, go to the toilet or whatever. When the adventuring PC turns up unexpectedly, are you really going to take the time to lock your weapon into your gauntlet, on the off-chance that they'll try and disarm you, or are you just going to draw your weapon and attack/defend yourself?

As a Player Character, on an adventure, sure...you'll have your weapon locked; you're specifically going out looking for a fight (in most cases...in a tavern brawl or random encounter, maybe not though...that is, of course, assuming you're playing by the rules rather than making fallacious assumptions about what your character is doing or has done...). An NPC, even if he does have a locked gauntlet (which I still think is going to be a relatively rare piece of equipment outside of very specially trained opponents like knights and elite guards that are also trained in the use of and wearing plate mail or similar armour), the actual chances of him using the damned thing are quite slim. I'm not talking about arena fights or encounters where a fight is both expected and inevetable...I'm talking about the everyday sort of encounter that a PC can expect to have to deal with. Any DM with any sort of sanity will not throw locked gauntleted foes at you in every fight. Assuming that he will is just being paranoid (unless your DM really does do it, in which cae you have one of the worst sort of DMs there is).

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-10, 06:04 PM
Consider that a one-handed fighter is going to want to do something with his off-hand...either wield another weapon or use a shield and his other hand isn't so free as you might think. Even if he does free that hand by leaving a wepaon sheathed while he climbs or opens the door, it's still means he's spending extra time to navigate those obstacles and be combat ready.
At higher levels, items that grant fly and spider climb eliminate the need for using hands to climb, and you can always kick down a door with your walking appendages if you're in a hurry.



You don't address the fact that it takes a full-round action to lock a gauntlet either. If you're a guard sitting in the barracks of a prison (or whatever), you aren't going to have your weapon ready-locked...you'll want it free to play cards, drink, go to the toilet or whatever.

Actually, if I were standing guard, I would have a locked gauntlet and only unlock it when I needed to take a break.

(which I still think is going to be a relatively rare piece of equipment outside of very specially trained opponents like knights and elite guards that are also trained in the use of and wearing plate mail or similar armour)[/quote]
8 gp, in the PHB. Inexpensive and I can't help but think relatively common given its cost.

You are arguing that it won't be common in campaign setting, as the PHB lists no rules restricting locked gauntlets to nobles and knights. Of course, you have no idea of the settings the rest of use, so what's your point? That you can imagine a setting in which they are not common, so that invalidates my point?


I'm not talking about arena fights or encounters where a fight is both expected and inevetable...I'm talking about the everyday sort of encounter that a PC can expect to have to deal with.
Which often involve fighting. That's the entire point of having classes specializing in fighting (Fighters, one might call them) along in your party.


Any DM with any sort of sanity will not throw locked gauntleted foes at you in every fight.
He could also throw enemies at you that use natural weapons. Good point.

JellyPooga
2009-11-10, 06:40 PM
At higher levels, items that grant fly and spider climb eliminate the need for using hands to climb, and you can always kick down a door with your walking appendages if you're in a hurry.

This is a valid point, yes. However, not everyone has access to flight or Spider Climb and kicking down a door is not always easy. Even a simple wooden door resists a Str 16 kick 50% of the time (break DC 13).


Actually, if I were standing guard, I would have a locked gauntlet and only unlock it when I needed to take a break.

If you were specifiaclly on guard, yes, you might well be ready-locked. However, you might notice that I said a guard in a barracks...i.e. off duty, yet still "on call" as it were...a good deal of encounters in dungeons and the like are not with the perimeter guards who are prepared for combat. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most encounters on the average adventure will not be with people that are actually expecting you for more than one round.


8 gp, in the PHB. Inexpensive and I can't help but think relatively common given its cost.

8gp is inexpensive to a PC, but not to the average NPC. 8gp is more than 2 months wages for a common labourer (1sp per day. 8gp = 80 days = approx. 2 months and 10 days). In modern terms, you're talking about just under four grand in pounds sterling, based on an 8-hour day at minimum wage in britain (I'm not sure about current exchange rates, but that's what? about US$6,000). This is not, perhaps, an accurate measurement of wealth comparison, but it's got to be fairly close given the wages presented by the RAW.


You are arguing that it won't be common in campaign setting... of course, you have no idea of the settings the rest of use, so what's your point.

No, I don't have any idea what sort of setting you are using. However, I can probably assume that the average setting that most people use is something close to a dark to middle-ages european standard. In such a setting, steel plate armour, including gauntlets (locked or otherwise), is simply not going to be common. The average town guard will wear leather armour or maybe a breastplate. Only the elite of society will have access to full plate armour and the accoutrements that go with it (amongst which are locked gauntlets). Typically, locked gauntlets will only be a feature of heavily armoured men. Common town guards and soldiers just won't have them. It's a specialised piece of equipment. It would be like equipping every modern soldier with a full field surgery kit or demolitions equipment in addition to their normal gear...it simply doesn't happen. If in your setting locked gauntlets are the norm for everyday soldiers, that's fine, but in the average D&D game, I'd be surprised to encounter troops with locked gauntlets more than once per adventure (outside of specific circumstances, like the adventure is going up against a cadre of evil knights or somesuch). So...what's your point? That you have an abnormal setting? Well done you.


He could also throw enemies at you that use natural weapons. Good point.

Congratulations for pointing out something that is completely irrelevant to the argument. Yes, you can't disarm natural weapons, I am fully aware of this. This does not make locked gauntlets any better. I'm not trying to argue that disarming is a valid tactic. I'm just saying that locked gauntlets aren't the be-all and end-all of resisting disarm tactics.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-10, 06:53 PM
In fact, I would go so far as to say that most encounters on the average adventure will not be with people that are actually expecting you for more than one round.
It is easy to make assertions without backing them up.



8gp is inexpensive to a PC, but not to the average NPC. 8gp is more than 2 months wages for a common labourer (1sp per day. 8gp = 80 days = approx. 2 months and 10 days). In modern terms, you're talking about just under four grand in pounds sterling, based on an 8-hour day at minimum wage in britain (I'm not sure about current exchange rates, but that's what? about US$6,000). This is not, perhaps, an accurate measurement of wealth comparison, but it's got to be fairly close given the wages presented by the RAW.
So how do these guards get enough equipment to poise a level appropriate threat to the PCs, if they just have enough wealth to have a mundane weapon and some armor and/or a shield? Something tells me it's not going to be a level appropriate encounter.


No, I don't have any idea what sort of setting you are using. However, I can probably assume that the average setting that most people use is something close to a dark to middle-ages european standard.
Without any data to support your position, I am going to say that no, no you cannot.

To prove a position, you have to use something stronger than "probably" and "assume". You need words like "data", "fact", and "statistically significant".


It would be like equipping every modern soldier with a full field surgery kit or demolitions equipment in addition to their normal gear...it simply doesn't happen.
Forgive me, but I doubt that you are an expert on medieval and modern forms of warfare. How am I to believe your comparison if you do not have credentials or data to back it up?


If in your setting locked gauntlets are the norm for everyday soldiers, that's fine, but in the average D&D game, I'd be surprised to encounter troops with locked gauntlets more than once per adventure (outside of specific circumstances, like the adventure is going up against a cadre of evil knights or somesuch).
Given that you have not done a study to determine what the average DnD game is like, I find your statement hard to believe.

If you in fact do have data on what the average DnD game is like, feel free to share it with me. Otherwise, your claim as to what the average DnD game is like is an unsupported claim and means nothing.


So...what's your point? That you have an abnormal setting? Well done you.
I think my point is that you make assumptions and call them fact.

Volkov
2009-11-10, 06:56 PM
D&D monks are more like an excuse to put in those cool martial arts movie powers into D&D. As we can see, cool martial arts powers are nowhere near as good as a Raging Orcish barbarian's great axe.

JellyPooga
2009-11-10, 07:29 PM
I hear that 87% of such statistics are made up on the spot.

"Most" is not a statistic. It's a vague statement and usually given as a statement of opinion rather than fact.


So how do these guards get enough equipment to poise a level appropriate threat to the PCs, if they just have enough wealth to have a weapon and some armor and/or a shield? Given the cost of weapons, armor, and shields, that is a very finely balanced amount of money, for them to buy the above equipment yet somehow be unable to afford an 8 gp locked gauntlet.

Guards generally don't buy their own equipment. It would be issued. A locked gauntlet, as a (as I'm sure I mentioned) specialist piece of equipment, won't be issued unless said guard is of exceptional quality. A bandit, raider, average orc tribesman, kobold defender or ogre chieftain (or what-have-you) will have whatever he can scavenge or buy off of his own back. This will generally not include fancy pieces of kit that have a very limited use. To make level appropriate encounters, class and racial abilities are generally of more import than equipment. Sure, an Orc wielding a greatsword will present a different encounter to one wielding a shortsword and tower shield, but it's the Orc itself and what feats and such it has that really makes the difference, not the equipment. In the case of a locked gauntlet, yes the gear will make a difference, but if one of my players had a focus on disarming, I would not equip every weapon-wielding opponent with one just to prove a point that they've made a sub-optimal character based on a single piece of equipment. This is largely because that would be a metagame reason for doing so, breaks the verisimilitude of the game and would be being a douche-bag to boot.


Without any data to support your position, I am going to say that no, no you cannot.

I can't assume the standard D&D setting, as presented by the Core rulebooks, is the setting used by most people in their games? uh....o.k....I guess? :smallconfused:


Forgive me, but I doubt that you are an expert on medieval and modern forms of warfare. This makes you comparison inaccurate and invalid.

So you believe that every modern soldier carries field surgery kit and a full demolitions kit? You equally believe that the average town guard in 13th to 15th century Europe was equipped with better gear than some low ranking nobles? I may be no expert, but I can make certain assumptions based on what knowledge I do have. I might not have studied medieval military history, but it doesn't mean I'm completely ignorant of what would be considered normal of the time. Give a man a little credit for making a reasonable assumption.


Given that you have not done a study to determine what the average DnD game is like, I find your statement hard to believe.

Again...give a man a little credit for reasonable assumption. I don't jump to conclusions from a standing start. If I jump to any conclusion it's with at least a running start and usually with at least a little training. I may not have made a study into peoples gaming habits, but based on the fact that D&D is a published game, purchased by people across the world and the supposition that most people will play a published game by the rules and standards laid down by the published material, I can probably assume that most people who play D&D will use the setting laid down by those books. If you believe otherwise, tat's your perogative. I can say nothing to make you believe otherwise, but that I think you're wrong in your belief.


I think my point is that you make assumptions and call them fact.

I may make assumptions, yes. I do not, however, call them absolute fact. Give me the turn of phrase to make a point more emphatic, but the gist of my posts is rarely anything but offering my own opinion and nothing more. I don't claim to dictate that you play D&D in a particular way, just that without evidence to the contrary, I can probably assume you play in a certain way. I can assume you use something approximating a 25 to 30 point buy to generate stats. I can assume Orcs in your campaign don't have 4 racial HD. I can assume that a +1 Longsword has a market price of 2,315gp.

I will say it again; I'm not talking about the ideal encounter, arena fights or specific circumstances. I'm talking about general game-play, where a tavern brawl is as likely a combat encounter as taking the local goblin tribe down a peg or slaying a dragon is. Over the course of a Player Characters gaming life, he should not expect to encounter that many locked-gauntlets. From the various monsters that don't even wield weapons to bandits and common guards, this circumstantial piece of kit, in the average run-of-the-mill dungeon crawling adventure just won't see that much air time...that's all I'm saying. If it does in your setting or game, hooray for you. I just don't think most people who play D&D would expect to see many of them outside of significant NPCs and other PCs.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-10, 07:36 PM
I can't assume the standard D&D setting, as presented by the Core rulebooks, is the setting used by most people in their games? uh....o.k....I guess?:smallconfused:

You assume it is the standard setting as presented by the Core rule books... and an 8 gp mundane item is at the same time almost impossibly hard to acquire.

Now, is there any part in the Core where it says locked gauntlets are hard to acquire? How about the degree to which you are to emulate medieval Europe?


So you believe that every modern soldier carries field surgery kit and a full demolitions kit? You equally believe that the average town guard in 13th to 15th century Europe was equipped with better gear than some low ranking nobles?

In DnD core setting, which you have assumed, there is only a peripheral resemblance to medieval Europe. So what is wrong with assuming an 8 gp mundane item is commonly available?


Again...give a man a little credit for reasonable assumption.
You have chosen the path of defeat. Allow me to explain: What seems reasonable often is not, unless you back up your assumptions with logic.


From the various monsters that don't even wield weapons
They don't even need it to resist disarm, which was another point I'm making. Why are you proving my position for me?

JellyPooga
2009-11-10, 07:48 PM
[scrub-a-dub-dub]

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-10, 08:38 PM
Ok, I probably should have included a smilie in that line.

If it bothers you that much, I can always remove it from the post.

Mongoose87
2009-11-10, 08:40 PM
Ok, I probably should have included a smilie in that line.

It was much funnier deadpanned.

Coidzor
2009-11-10, 08:46 PM
I never really got why they didn't have fighting class BAB in the first place, to be honest.

Mongoose87
2009-11-10, 08:51 PM
I never really got why they didn't have fighting class BAB in the first place, to be honest.

I mentioned this at my campaign, a bit ago, and one player, who usually has a pretty good understanding of class power, said it was because they get so much stuff already. *Ahem*

Starbuck_II
2009-11-10, 08:54 PM
That was probably the idea: although if there was synergy with there stuff they might be okay wth 3/4th bab: Swordsage did it sucessfully.

So it isn't impossible for Monks if they had better thingies.

holywhippet
2009-11-10, 09:20 PM
I never really got why they didn't have fighting class BAB in the first place, to be honest.

I think it was to compensate for flurry of blows - more attacks balanced out by less odds of an attack hitting. The d8 hit die was what confused me more. A monk is seeking to master the power of their own body, they should be tougher than a fighter, not weaker.

Personally I feel they should try to introduce soft style martial arts with the monk - where they don't just block or dodge an attack but instead grab their attacker and toss them across the room using their own momentum.

JellyPooga
2009-11-11, 05:01 AM
You assume it is the standard setting as presented by the Core rule books... and an 8 gp mundane item is at the same time almost impossibly hard to acquire.

Now, is there any part in the Core where it says locked gauntlets are hard to acquire? How about the degree to which you are to emulate medieval Europe?

In DnD core setting, which you have assumed, there is only a peripheral resemblance to medieval Europe. So what is wrong with assuming an 8 gp mundane item is commonly available?

You are correct in as much as there is nothing in the rules to say that your campaign need resemble medieval europe in any way or that locked gauntlets should be a relatively rare piece of equipment. However, based on the prices given for living costs and wages, we can deduce that for a commoner 8gp is quite a lot of money. Perhaps not quite the same ball-park figure modern equivalent I gave earlier, but a fair amount regardless. One thing you should bear in mind is that adventurers (read:PCs) tend not to worry about all the daily costs that a commoner must; rent, food, heating, taxes, etc. Whilst they do have to pay for these things, the cost of them is insignificant compared to their income (usually). To someone that is only earning 1 to 3 silver per day (again a figure taken from the rules), it would take them years of scrimping and saving to be able to afford 8gp after factoring their daily costs. Hell, even the cheapest fighting weapon, a paltry dagger, is probably beyond their means.

If it takes the average person that long to earn that amount of money, it can safely be deduced that an 8gp item is restricted to a wealthy elite. Given that it is also a circumstantial piece of equipment, it can then also be deemed to be a specialist piece of equipment and thus, only purchased by a specially trained few of that wealthy elite. How big that wealthy elite is in your campaign is, is entirely up to you as GM. Commoners, however, are called that for a reason (and it's not that they don't talk proppa an' drink laaager, innit!). By the city building rules (as found in the DMG), 91% of the NPC population of any town, village or city are 1st level Commoners. That's a significant demographic of people in the 1-3sp a day bracket.

Now, this is not to say that your PCs are going to be encountering any of tat demographic. In your game, you might have your PCs pitted against a Mercenaries Guild who all specialise in a combat style that advocates the use of locked gauntlets (for example). This, however, would be campaign specific. In another campaign, the PCs will go up against hard-done-by Bandits, who come from peasant stock. These opponents probably will not have even heard of a locked gauntlet, let alone be equipped with one.


They don't even need it to resist disarm, which was another point I'm making. Why are you proving my position for me?

As I've already said, I'm not advocating disarm as a valid tactic. My argument is that locked gauntlets aren't the automatic disarm defeater that you might assume it is. Yes it gives a big bonus against disarm. Yes it's a cheap (for a PC), mundane item. On the other hand, it's circumstantial, specialist and expensive to the average NPC. I'm just saying that if my DM threw locked gauntlets at us (especially if one of us has a disarming schtick as part of his character build) in every fight, I'd call shenanigans. Yes, it's the DMs perogative to challenge his players, but obfuscating an ability like that on a regular basis smells a bit like trying to "win" the game...it'd be like having every monster surround by an AMF versus an all caster party or equipped with a Ring of Freedom of Movement versus a grapple build...

Kurald Galain
2009-11-11, 05:07 AM
You are correct in as much as there is nothing in the rules to say that your campaign need resemble medieval europe in any way or that locked gauntlets should be a relatively rare piece of equipment. However, based on the prices given for living costs and wages, we can deduce that for a commoner 8gp is quite a lot of money.

The point is that anyone who can afford a 15-gp longsword and a 100-gp chainmail can also afford an 8-gp gauntlet.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-11, 05:24 AM
This is a valid point, yes. However, not everyone has access to flight or Spider Climb and kicking down a door is not always easy. Even a simple wooden door resists a Str 16 kick 50% of the time (break DC 13).Anyone who does not have access to flight by the time he hits level 11 deserves death.


If you were specifiaclly on guard, yes, you might well be ready-locked. However, you might notice that I said a guard in a barracks...i.e. off duty, yet still "on call" as it were...a good deal of encounters in dungeons and the like are not with the perimeter guards who are prepared for combat. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most encounters on the average adventure will not be with people that are actually expecting you for more than one round.I'd say that most dungeon encounters on average are with opponents in a hostile environment, who know they're in a hostile environment.

8gp is inexpensive to a PC, but not to the average NPC. 8gp is more than 2 months wages for a common labourer (1sp per day. 8gp = 80 days = approx. 2 months and 10 days). In modern terms, you're talking about just under four grand in pounds sterling, based on an 8-hour day at minimum wage in britain (I'm not sure about current exchange rates, but that's what? about US$6,000). This is not, perhaps, an accurate measurement of wealth comparison, but it's got to be fairly close given the wages presented by the RAW.Guess that means that most weapons are incredibly rare. I mean, longswords, 15gp. Short Sword, 10gp.

Don't even get me started on armor. Chain Shirt, 100gp. Studded Leather, 10gp.

Now we can assume that most common laborers won't be holding locked gauntlets. Or swords. Or wearing armor.

Next step, moving onward to foes that are actually credible threats. Trained guards, for example, who, even if they aren't wealthy, are presumably hired by someone who can afford to equip his men.


Congratulations for pointing out something that is completely irrelevant to the argument. Yes, you can't disarm natural weapons, I am fully aware of this. This does not make locked gauntlets any better. I'm not trying to argue that disarming is a valid tactic. I'm just saying that locked gauntlets aren't the be-all and end-all of resisting disarm tactics.
No, he's stating that there's more than one way to mitigate disarming.

JellyPooga
2009-11-11, 05:29 AM
The point is that anyone who can afford a 15-gp longsword and a 100-gp chainmail can also afford an 8-gp gauntlet.

Likely, yes, but my point is that the people that can afford those should not be every man and his dog.

A peasant bandit leader might have a good quality longsword and mail (maybe even a locked gauntlet!) but his men will more likely be armed with staves, slings and spears. If they can afford hundreds of gold to buy weapons and armour for everyone, why are they living rough out in the woods?

A mighty Orc Warlord will probably have field plate, a greatsword and all manner of fancy gear. His elite troops and bodyguard might also have good equipment. His bog-standard grunts won't. Why would he fork out thousands of gold to equip his horde of mooks with locked gauntlets when all they're there to do is get in the way of some arrows (largely speaking)?

An elite cadre of evil Knights probably would have locked gauntlets, but the goblins that serve as their men-at-arms, common guards and all-round dogs-bodies? Not so much.

My point is that whilst a locked gauntlet is relatively cheap, it's still not actually cheap. Put it like this; If I can afford a Ferrari, I can afford a Transit Van and might well have one (after all there are many things a Transit can do that a Ferrari can't). It doesn't make the Transit any cheaper for the guy working part-time at minimum wage, so he'll probably not buy the Transit because it's too expensive for his means and at the end of the day, he just doesn't need it. Now substitute the word "Ferrari" for "Longsword" and "Transit Van" for "Locked Gauntlet"...see my point?

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-11, 05:36 AM
Likely, yes, but my point is that the people that can afford those should not be every man and his dog.
Good thing that PC's don't fight every man and his dog. They limit themselves to targets that are a threat.


A peasant bandit leader might have a good quality longsword and mail (maybe even a locked gauntlet!) but his men will more likely be armed with staves, slings and spears. If they can afford hundreds of gold to buy weapons and armour for everyone, why are they living rough out in the woods?Who knows? But if his men are each CR 2, then they each have about 130gp of equipment, RAW. That puts such things in easy reach.


A mighty Orc Warlord will probably have field plate, a greatsword and all manner of fancy gear. His elite troops and bodyguard might also have good equipment. His bog-standard grunts won't. Why would he fork out thousands of gold to equip his horde of mooks with locked gauntlets when all they're there to do is get in the way of some arrows (largely speaking)?He doesn't. The DMG does. When it lists wealth by CR. Go figure, many of those grunts may have held up people for their wealth.

An elite cadre of evil Knights probably would have locked gauntlets, but the goblins that serve as their men-at-arms, common guards and all-round dogs-bodies? Not so much.Provided that they're at least CR 2? Yep, they can.


My point is that whilst a locked gauntlet is relatively cheap, it's still not actually cheap. Put it like this; If I can afford a Ferrari, I can afford a Transit Van and might well have one (after all there are many things a Transit can do that a Ferrari can't). It doesn't make the Transit any cheaper for the guy working part-time at minimum wage, so he'll probably not buy the Transit because it's too expensive for his means and at the end of the day, he just doesn't need it. Now substitute the word "Ferrari" for "Longsword" and "Transit Van" for "Locked Gauntlet"...see my point?
Now assume that most anyone who the typical DND PC will be facing isn't a minimum wage part time worker, but a qualified driver of fast automobiles.

In other words, a level 5 party won't be beating up scrubs with sticks and face paint.

JellyPooga
2009-11-11, 05:50 AM
Anyone who does not have access to flight by the time he hits level 11 deserves death.

Unless the encounter is in somewhere with a low ceiling, like a very dense forest, normal building or dungeon. Flight is good in open space, but indoors? Not as much.


I'd say that most dungeon encounters on average are with opponents in a hostile environment, who know they're in a hostile environment.

Let's take a typcial dungeon delving scenario. You are Joe Orc. You signed up with Fizznob the Minotaur 'cos 'e'z ded 'ard an' e' gave yer a shiny noo axe to play wiv'. You're in Fizznobs dungeon lair, but you're not on duty. Your mate Grak is standing guard at the entrance to the dungeon, but you're in the mess chowing down on a nice rat-on-a-stick and are going to the barracks after that to play a game of cards...you're not worried about the possibilty of being killed right now because your mate is at the gate an' 'e'z ded solid iz Grak an' 'e got a shiny noo axe too an' it'z ded choppy! Suddenly, a bunch of 'umies burst through the door and start hacking your mess-mates to bits. "Wot 'appened to Grak?" You think, but not for long because a beefy human is swinging a sword at your head. Grak never reported the incoming adventurers because his head is still rolling down the mountain-side.

This sort of scenario is exactly why adventurers are supposed to be good for the jobs they do. Where an army would make a lot of noise and allow the denizens of the lair to get ready, an adventuring party can do is quickly and stealthily. Be in and out before the bad-guys realise what's going on. If the bad-guys are prepared fro them coming, the PCs have largely done something wrong.


Guess that means that most weapons are incredibly rare. I mean, longswords, 15gp. Short Sword, 10gp.

Don't even get me started on armor. Chain Shirt, 100gp. Studded Leather, 10gp.

Now we can assume that most common laborers won't be holding locked gauntlets. Or swords. Or wearing armor.

Well...yes. Most people won't be armed to the teeth. Just because the PCs are, doesn't mean that 90% of the population will be.


Next step, moving onward to foes that are actually credible threats. Trained guards, for example, who, even if they aren't wealthy, are presumably hired by someone who can afford to equip his men.

Yes they will be hired by someone that can afford to equip his men, but is he really going to bother spending the extra 8gp per man for something that they A)probably won't bother using half the time and B)is a piece of equipment that actually has use so rarely? I'm going to verge on the side of "no" on this one. People that are wealthy are wealthy because they know the value of money in relation to the things they buy with it. A locked gauntlet is too circumstantial for common usage.


No, he's stating that there's more than one way to mitigate disarming.

I don't dispute that. I never have! I'm only responding to a particular comment that off-handedly dismissed disarm based on the existence of Locked Gauntlets. I have said that I'm not arguing that disarm is a good tactic to build your character around seveal times now! My only point is that locked gauntlets aren't the be-all and end-all of the subject. That is all!

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-11, 06:44 AM
Unless the encounter is in somewhere with a low ceiling, like a very dense forest, normal building or dungeon. Flight is good in open space, but indoors? Not as much.Irrelevant. Presumably, a well-equipped PC is not going to assume that every encounter he faces will be in a low-ceiling building, or a dense forest. He should accept the fact that the mission may indeed take him to a savannah, mountain, or the like.


Let's take a typcial dungeon delving scenario. You are Joe Orc. You signed up with Fizznob the Minotaur 'cos 'e'z ded 'ard an' e' gave yer a shiny noo axe to play wiv'. You're in Fizznobs dungeon lair, but you're not on duty. Your mate Grak is standing guard at the entrance to the dungeon, but you're in the mess chowing down on a nice rat-on-a-stick and are going to the barracks after that to play a game of cards...you're not worried about the possibilty of being killed right now because your mate is at the gate an' 'e'z ded solid iz Grak an' 'e got a shiny noo axe too an' it'z ded choppy! Suddenly, a bunch of 'umies burst through the door and start hacking your mess-mates to bits. "Wot 'appened to Grak?" You think, but not for long because a beefy human is swinging a sword at your head. Grak never reported the incoming adventurers because his head is still rolling down the mountain-side.
Let's consider another one. You are Joe Orc. You're 100 feet down a hallway, in a room with a flimsy door. You're at a table, chowin' down, when you hear a racket at the front door. Evidently, Grak's in a fight, and even you, with your -1 wis modifier and no ranks in listen can hear the DC -20 fight through a door (DC +10) at a distance of 100 feet (DC +10). While Grak's getting his head chopped in, you're getting ready.

Let's consider another. The sly wizard in his dungeon fortress places Alarm spells periodically, near his guardposts.

Or another. The kobolds have a deadfall trap set up near their living space. A very loud deadfall.


This sort of scenario is exactly why adventurers are supposed to be good for the jobs they do. Where an army would make a lot of noise and allow the denizens of the lair to get ready, an adventuring party can do is quickly and stealthily. Be in and out before the bad-guys realise what's going on. If the bad-guys are prepared fro them coming, the PCs have largely done something wrong. Then the barbarian class must be doing something wrong. Or rather, any class but rogue.


Well...yes. Most people won't be armed to the teeth. Just because the PCs are, doesn't mean that 90% of the population will be.The PC's, assuming they fight CR-appropriate encounters, will make an expected amount of gold from each. This gold doesn't magically appear when the enemy dies, a la videogames. It's actually on their person. Which means it can be used for possessions. It's called "equipping an NPC", and is done often.

When you're fighting a CR 5 opponent, he will have CR 5 wealth. When you're fighting a CR 9 opponent, he will have CR 9 wealth.


Yes they will be hired by someone that can afford to equip his men, but is he really going to bother spending the extra 8gp per man for something that they A)probably won't bother using half the time and B)is a piece of equipment that actually has use so rarely? I'm going to verge on the side of "no" on this one. People that are wealthy are wealthy because they know the value of money in relation to the things they buy with it. A locked gauntlet is too circumstantial for common usage.And that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it.

Doesn't make it right, but you're always welcome to have opinions.


I don't dispute that. I never have! I'm only responding to a particular comment that off-handedly dismissed disarm based on the existence of Locked Gauntlets. I have said that I'm not arguing that disarm is a good tactic to build your character around seveal times now! My only point is that locked gauntlets aren't the be-all and end-all of the subject. That is all!
Then would it make you feel better if I said that locked gauntlets aren't the only reason that Disarm sucks, although they're certainly a contributing factor? After all, there are weapon enhancements that make you immune to disarm, natural weapons, spellcasters, and many other things that obviate disarming entirely.

Now, for the interest of expediency, I could also just state the cheapest, most easily obtained of the above, and make the general point clear, without going into a mind-numbing level of detail...

But that will apparently summon contrary posters who take up their crusade against the cheapest option, all the while, agreeing with my general point that I made in the first place.

Hm.

You see, I'm not making the point you seem to be thinking I'm making. I'm not saying "OMG every person in every bar should have a locking gauntlet because that'll show those disarming PC's."

I'm merely pointing out that it's a valid and effective defense, and relatively inexpensive to boot.

JellyPooga
2009-11-11, 07:12 AM
Irrelevant. Presumably, a well-equipped PC is not going to assume that every encounter he faces will be in a low-ceiling building, or a dense forest. He should accept the fact that the mission may indeed take him to a savannah, mountain, or the like.

I don't disagree that a well prepared PC should have flight as an option. However, my comment on the fact that encounters occur (fairly frequently) in locations where flight isn't really an option does have relevance to your comment that anything without it by Lvl.11 deserves to die. A denizen of the Underdark (for example) is no less deadly for not being able to fly in an environment that doesn't allow for aerial maneuvers.


...rest of the post...

Fair enough. I don't disagree with most of what you posit. Disarm is not a good tactic to rely on for all the reasons you give, not at least without some kind of back-up to fall back on should your disarming tactics go awry. I just don't think that locked gauntlets should be as common a foil as some seem to think it could be. To me it's like saying that a greatsword is always a better weapon than a dagger because it does more damage. It's not. You can't throw a greatsword (without the use of certain feats/abilities) and nor is it easily concealable or Finessable. Yes the locked gauntlet has its merits, but it doesn't obviate disarm completely by itself (which, whilst I realise is not what you're saying, is all I am saying).

Androgeus
2009-11-11, 11:24 AM
To me it's like saying that a greatsword is always a better weapon than a dagger because it does more damage. It's not. You can't throw a greatsword (without the use of certain feats/abilities).

But you can:


It is possible to throw a weapon that isnít designed to be thrown (that is, a melee weapon that doesnít have a numeric entry in the Range Increment column on Table: Weapons), but a character who does so takes a -4 penalty on the attack roll. Throwing a light or one-handed weapon is a standard action, while throwing a two-handed weapon is a full-round action. Regardless of the type of weapon, such an attack scores a threat only on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. Such a weapon has a range increment of 10 feet.

On average it's 2.5dmg vs 7(and a wasted move action and an extra -4 on the attack), bit of a waste of a turn, but it is still possible

Now I want to make a character who actually does throw greatswords, even if it is slightly sub-optimal.

Kaiyanwang
2009-11-11, 11:28 AM
As far as I know, a monk is a class able to generate 100-miles-long threads.

Only wizards can hope to challenge this power.

/trolling

Morty
2009-11-11, 12:48 PM
As far as I know, a monk is a class able to generate 100-miles-long threads.

Only wizards can hope to challenge this power.

/trolling

See? You've got a unique ability right here.
I can't say I've ever had any problem with what is monk supposed to be. He's supposed to be a martial artist who fights with no armor and weapons thanks to his training, inner balance, concentration or somesuch crap, therefore being nimble, agile and precise. Quite simple, really.

Prime32
2009-11-11, 01:40 PM
But you can:



On average it's 2.5dmg vs 7(and a wasted move action and an extra -4 on the attack), bit of a waste of a turn, but it is still possible

Now I want to make a character who actually does throw greatswords, even if it is slightly sub-optimal.There's the Throw Anything feat from Complete Warrior, and the bloodstorm blade PrC from Tome of Battle.

Mongoose87
2009-11-11, 01:42 PM
There's the Throw Anything feat from Complete Warrior, and the bloodstorm blade PrC from Tome of Battle.

You know what's great about Bloodstorm Blade? It uses up maneuvers, but it doesn't give you any additional ones.

Prime32
2009-11-11, 01:44 PM
You know what's great about Bloodstorm Blade? It uses up maneuvers, but it doesn't give you any additional ones.But it negates the effects of the Shaky flaw (effectively giving you a free feat) and that 10th-level ability is ridiculous. You still add your full BB level to your levels in warblade to determine initiator level, so it's not a total loss.