PDA

View Full Version : Monk why does this suck?



Pages : [1] 2

Half-orc Bard
2010-11-06, 06:38 PM
Everyone says that monks suck. I don't see why. With the Fist of the forest PrC In complete champion you can add you con to your AC. If you get an okay str. good wis good dex and great Con you can get an amazing ac. True they don't deal the damage of wizard or the have skillmonkeyness of a rouge, but it can t get hit. I made a lvl 10 Monk with 35 ac. Why do people not love this class?

true_shinken
2010-11-06, 06:44 PM
35 AC by level 10 is not that awesome. At that level, a gish can get higher AC and he would still be useful.

Also, this week's monk thread is late.

LordShotGun
2010-11-06, 06:45 PM
"Sigh" yet another thread like this. Is it that time of the month already? No offense but there has been thread upon thread discussing this topic...

To refute the AC point, AC becomes much less valuable later on as monsters get SLAs and casting levels which can seriously fork over your monk as most spells are wont to do too meleers.

Tengu_temp
2010-11-06, 06:45 PM
1. 35 AC on level 10 is not that impressive for an AC-focused build.
2. This character's bad at everything but AC. AC matters less and less the higher you go in levels. Furthermore, you just encourage enemies to completely ignore you and go for the squishier party members instead.
3. You need four high stats and a very strong prestige class to turn the monk into something barely decent. With the same statblock you could turn any other class into a paragon of whatever it's supposed to do.

WarKitty
2010-11-06, 06:46 PM
Didn't we have one last sunday or something? I vote that this thread is early, not late.

Private-Prinny
2010-11-06, 06:46 PM
Is it that time of the week again? I may as well scratch the tip of the iceberg.


Most class features replicate things that other classes have been doing since lower levels.
Flurry of Blows can't be used in the same round as their impressive speed, making two of their signature abilities mutually exclusive.
Needs good scores in pretty much everything to survive.
Finally, I remember seeing a quote somewhere on this board: "Monks are a defensive class in a game dominated by powerful offensive options. You still need a rocket to win at rocket tag, even if you're better at dodging rockets than most."

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-06, 06:47 PM
"Sigh" yet another thread like this. Is it that time of the month already? No offense but there has been thread upon thread discussing this topic...

i though we had another day before monkday :smallfrown:

Monks suck cause their damage isn't as good as a fighter and their class abilities cancel each other out. oh and the fact that a wizard can do the same things with spells levels earlier

EDIT: ninja'ed so hard my head spun :smalltongue:

Flickerdart
2010-11-06, 06:49 PM
Monk is a fantastic two-level class. Fist of the Forest is a fantastic 1-level PrC. I don't know what anyone has against either one. :smalltongue:

Rixx
2010-11-06, 06:50 PM
Monks are fun.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-06, 06:54 PM
Monk is a fantastic two-level class. Fist of the Forest is a fantastic 1-level PrC. I don't know what anyone has against either one. :smalltongue:

its not a class its a dip. Monks suck as a straight class and most of the things a Monk does can and will be replicated with minimal effort by most/all other classes

Ranielle
2010-11-06, 06:54 PM
It's always good to see some people deriving satisfaction from one aspect of their otherwise pitiful lives.

AslanCross
2010-11-06, 06:57 PM
Sigh, I wish we'd have a stickied Monk thread.


If you get an okay str. good wis good dex and great Con you can get an amazing ac.

This is precisely why. You need lots of good stats to be any good.

Also, they have a whole bunch of abilities that don't synergize. Flurry of Blows needs a full attack. If you full attack, you can't really use your speed. Also, you'll probably miss a lot.

Finally, all of their "martial arts" talents (which consist entirely of hitting lots of times, pressure points [Stunning Fist, if you take it] and the really lame Quivering Palm) are more effectively performed by the Swordsage, which has the same flavor but far more versatility, as it can do Judo throws, rock-breaking punches, jumping attacks, pressure point strikes, and even kill things with fire.

Monk is great 2-level dip, since it grants bonus feats while skipping the prerequisites. Monk/Swordsage is great if you want to build a Setting Sun Unarmed Swordsage.

Smiling Knight
2010-11-06, 06:58 PM
Just to save time:

Giacomo: Monks are as strong as wizards with UMD and partially charged wands.

[Respected forum members]: No they are not.

Giacomo: Yes they are. You all just abuse the rules.

[Rfm]: No u

G: No u

Repeat until someone challenges G to duel, which then never happens.

Half-orc Bard
2010-11-06, 07:02 PM
okay I'm wondering if there are hand wrappings in other games making it able to put magic weapon enchantments on your unarmed strike. That might of tiped the scale a little bit.

rokar4life
2010-11-06, 07:03 PM
ahem. swordsage aaaannndddd.... out


EDIT: I thought it needed and ahem

Flickerdart
2010-11-06, 07:03 PM
its not a class its a dip. Monks suck as a straight class and most of the things a Monk does can and will be replicated with minimal effort by most/all other classes
That was the joke, yes.

Murdim
2010-11-06, 07:06 PM
okay I'm wondering if there are hand wrappings in other games making it able to put magic weapon enchantments on your unarmed strike. That might of tiped the scale a little bit.
Necklace of Natural Weapons (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99215) is your best bet.

AslanCross
2010-11-06, 07:08 PM
okay I'm wondering if there are hand wrappings in other games making it able to put magic weapon enchantments on your unarmed strike. That might of tiped the scale a little bit.

The Ki Straps from Magic Item Compendium make your Stunning Fist stronger.
The Amulet of Mighty Fists grants an enhancement bonus.

But Magic Weapon properties? The only way I know to get those on a Monk's fists is the Kensai. The funny thing is that wow, the point of the class is that you can kill stuff with your fists---but you need magic items or a PrC's class features to catch up with the fighter with a flaming sword! :smallsigh: In other words, the Monk doesn't really give what it says it gives.

Lev
2010-11-06, 07:10 PM
I believe the argument, like most arguments that belittle a class, revolve around "there's more to do in a dungeon than hit things" whether it be with a sword, with a fist or with a horse.

Starbuck_II
2010-11-06, 07:13 PM
I believe the argument, like most arguments that belittle a class, revolve around "there's more to do in a dungeon than hit things" whether it be with a sword, with a fist or with a horse.

Who hits things with horses? :smallconfused:

Eldariel
2010-11-06, 07:13 PM
Monk is a fantastic two-level class. Fist of the Forest is a fantastic 1-level PrC. I don't know what anyone has against either one. :smalltongue:

FotF is fine for all 3 levels, actually. It's quite the good class overall. Monk on the other hand...


Ok, the fundamental issue with Monk is:
- He's supposed to hit things but he only has medium BAB.
- He needs a huge number of high stats to shine (Str, Dex, Wis, Con and to lesser extent, Int) but the game only has limited stat allotment.
- Even if he has all 18s, he can still only focus on pumping one of the key stats with level-ups and all.

As JaronK likes to say, it's a well-designed class...for its own power level. Design-wise, it has a constant stream of (more or less) flavorful abilities and no dead levels. The issue is that its power level is below that of even the other martial characters though, let alone casters. Note that these criticisms only apply to single-classed Monks; as stated, the first two levels are excellent and 6 levels have something going on for them.

The issue is all the other levels. The next ability that's actually worth taking class levels for comes on 11 and then you just get nothing (Spell Resistance is, unfortunately, both worse than what the spell by the same name gives you, and less impressive than what it sounds like). There are other problems but that's the crux of it.

Ernir
2010-11-06, 07:15 PM
I believe the argument, like most arguments that belittle a class, revolve around "there's more to do in a dungeon than hit things" whether it be with a sword, with a fist or with a horse.

Man, I want to kill someone by hitting them with a horse.

FMArthur
2010-11-06, 07:15 PM
Monks are bad because...

They get a large pile of very situational abilities that don't have anything to do with one another and don't synergise in any notable way.
They require decent stats in Str, Dex, Con and Wis while actually seeing weaker return on investing in them than more focused classes.
Your fists are a merely *decent* weapon that are difficult to enhance, and with your BAB aren't as effective as they might be. The best you can hope for is to optimize like crazy to get damage merely on par with a totally unoptimized Barbarian using a two-handed greatsword and Power Attack. I can see Monk's unarmed progression, in some scenarios, being a fun and flavorful trade for weapon proficiencies. As your main class feature, it just plain sucks.
Flurry of Misses. Medium BAB and an unexceptional Strength bonus hurts.
Because you need so many different stats, your AC from Wisdom and Dex combined is rarely going to even compensate for simple armor. Yet another primary class feature that loses you something almost everyone gets and fails to even keep up with what you lost. You have all high saves and fast movement, though. Hopefully they make up for your difficult-to-improve AC and mediocre hit points.
Being a survival-focused character might be nice individually, but when you are working with a group of people to win battles as a team, keeping yourself safe fails as a strategy. You can't even force people to target you instead of your allies and you don't rate high enough on the threat list for enemies to bother killing you when your allies seem capable of causing them far more harm.
The final nail in the coffin is that a couple of other options steal all of a Monks (situationally) desirable abilities and give them to classes that can do things with them. Notably the Unarmed Swordsage is a truer-to-flavor Monk that has strong offensive and defensive options; comparing them is like comparing a Fighter to a Fighter variant that gets twice as many feats at no extra cost - one of them is simply and objectively superior. Tashalatora is a feat that adds what is equivalent to a Monk gestalt to any psionic class you want. That means, basically, that psychic spellcasters, who are already way better than Monks in every respect, get to take all of his stuff for almost nothing. The worst part about all of this is that these options aren't even used most of the time because their superiority to weapons and armor is highly suspect.

AslanCross
2010-11-06, 07:15 PM
Who hits things with horses? :smallconfused:

Hulking Hurlers.

Or trebuchets.

...make that dead, rotting horses and you've got a siege engine.

Nohwl
2010-11-06, 07:17 PM
Who hits things with horses? :smallconfused:

drunken masters?

Keld Denar
2010-11-06, 07:20 PM
Ever hear the expression "beating a dead horse"? It's really a shortened version of "beating someone with a dead horse".

No horses were harmed in the typing of this post.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-06, 07:24 PM
No horses were harmed in the typing of this post.

what about in the inspiration for this post?

Eldariel
2010-11-06, 07:30 PM
Monks are bad because...

Flurry of Misses. Medium BAB and an unexceptional Strength bonus hurts.

Don't forget that you need full attack to use Flurry...which means you can't use Monk's speed. That, and you can't use it first round of the combat. That alone makes Flurry just very meh. Not to mention the fact that since enhancing Monk's attacks is hard, that's further detrimental for the attack bonus.

Shademan
2010-11-06, 07:51 PM
Real DM's makes monks work.


or you know... just DM for noobs and give monks full BaB.

Flickerdart
2010-11-06, 07:59 PM
Real DM's makes monks work.


or you know... just DM for noobs and give monks full BaB.
That doesn't make Monk any good, though.

AslanCross
2010-11-06, 08:01 PM
Real DM's makes monks work.


or you know... just DM for noobs

I did that. He still sucked.


and give monks full BaB.
This still does not solve the problem of the Monk not really doing what it says it does. Flurry and Fast Movement still do not synergize. The Monk is still MAD. Its class features still don't give it much.

Starbuck_II
2010-11-06, 08:03 PM
I did that. He still sucked.


This still does not solve the problem of the Monk not really doing what it says it does. Flurry and Fast Movement still do not synergize. The Monk is still MAD. Its class features still don't give it much.

Ooh, let monks Flurry at the end of a charge? Not pounce where any attack, just Flurry ones. It makes thematic sense and boost the Speed to augment the flurry.

true_shinken
2010-11-06, 08:04 PM
I think monk is a really cool guy eh sucks at fighting and doesnt afraid of anything

The Glyphstone
2010-11-06, 08:05 PM
I think monk is a really cool guy eh sucks at fighting and doesnt afraid of anything

Not true. Haven't you watched the show? He's a total germaphobe with major OCD - dude is terrified of dirt and grime.

Gensh
2010-11-06, 08:41 PM
Real DM's makes monks work.


or you know... just DM for noobs and give monks full BaB.

That's a good point, actually. In the first campaign I ran, the monk was by far the best member of the party. Then again, the celestial giant bee the wizard summoned once was third out of seven-ish, so...

Greenish
2010-11-06, 09:10 PM
The Ki Straps from Magic Item Compendium make your Stunning Fist stronger.
The Amulet of Mighty Fists grants an enhancement bonus.

But Magic Weapon properties?Battle Fist! :smallcool:

Zeful
2010-11-06, 09:14 PM
Ooh, let monks Flurry at the end of a charge? Not pounce where any attack, just Flurry ones. It makes thematic sense and boost the Speed to augment the flurry.

Or you could simply let them Flurry whenever they make an attack, sync up the attack bonuses for Unarmed strike so that they flurry at a bonus at about level 8-10.

NineThePuma
2010-11-06, 09:31 PM
Flurry on any attack, starting at -2 on all, but lessening the penalties at the same points where damage dice is increased?

Don't touch BAB, cause you'll end up with a +18/+18/+18/+13/+8 set up. That's not particularly bad by my measurement.

Lev
2010-11-06, 09:33 PM
Who hits things with horses? :smallconfused:
Pa lala dins

Grynning
2010-11-06, 09:37 PM
Or you could simply let them Flurry whenever they make an attack, sync up the attack bonuses for Unarmed strike so that they flurry at a bonus at about level 8-10.

The Snap Kick feat from ToB basically IS flurry on every attack. Really, the whole class feature could be replaced with "You gain Snap Kick as a bonus feat." If you wanted to beef them further, they could gain the same benefit of the feat and let it stack if they took the feat again.

VirOath
2010-11-06, 09:45 PM
okay I'm wondering if there are hand wrappings in other games making it able to put magic weapon enchantments on your unarmed strike. That might of tiped the scale a little bit.

Everquest RPG, runs on the D20 system and most of it is compatible with 3.X with very little change. Just ignore the weapon speed, but they do have Handwraps that can be enchanted and are magical weapons already.

On another note, Everquest Monks are actually kinda scary :smallbiggrin:

mikej
2010-11-06, 10:18 PM
Just to save time:

Giacomo: Monks are as strong as wizards with UMD and partially charged wands.

[Respected forum members]: No they are not.

Giacomo: Yes they are. You all just abuse the rules.

[Rfm]: No u

G: No u

Repeat until someone challenges G to duel, which then never happens.

Haven't posted in awhile but that is far to good to not sig.

The Shadowmind
2010-11-06, 10:41 PM
To make monks better:
Increase BaB to full.
Proficiency with simple and martial weapons.
Give monks the ability to move up there land speed as a swift action.(Basically an unlimited use Travel Devotion), maybe at level 6
Slow fall-completely replaced by constant feather fall.
Purity of body, prevents magical and normal.
Allow flurry with any weapon.
Make Abundant Step, 1/2(rounded down) monk level times per day.
Quivering Palm- Daily ability instead of weakly.


And gestalt the monk with the adept.

tyckspoon
2010-11-06, 10:56 PM
marital weapons.


Do an extra 2d6 when employed against Rouges.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-06, 10:58 PM
Do an extra 2d6 when employed against Rouges.

why would you want to harm makeup? Marital Weapons do an extra 2D6 against anything with a CHA of 12+ though

AslanCross
2010-11-07, 01:31 AM
To make monks better:
Increase BaB to full.
Okay. Not really necessary, though, as the Swordsage isn't full BAB. (By that token, neither are the Druid and Cleric, but those two cheat anyway.)


Proficiency with simple and martial weapons.
How is this necessary? Isn't the point of the Monk supposed to be a character who can do martial arts well? Granted, there are many martial arts that use weapons, but how is he different from a fighter or barbarian, then, who likely have the strength and armor to safely hit the enemy?


Give monks the ability to move up there land speed as a swift action.(Basically an unlimited use Travel Devotion), maybe at level 6
Okay, cool. Works with Flurry.


Slow fall-completely replaced by constant feather fall.
Slightly less pathetic, but still highly situational. Also, how do you justify this fluffwise? All monks are trained in HALO drops or something?


Purity of body, prevents magical and normal.
The paladin has this, and that doesn't make it any more awesome.


Allow flurry with any weapon.
Again, cool, but it kind of makes the monk simply "a guy who hits things with a sword, just faster than the fighter." In this case, he's going to end up using a greatsword or greataxe.


Make Abundant Step, 1/2(rounded down) monk level times per day. So he can run away better?


Quivering Palm- Daily ability instead of weakly.
Odd to make a quivering palm with a greatsword. Cutting the guy up is easy enough to do with just using a weapon. I guess it's still a good option when you grapple the other guy, though.


And gestalt the monk with the adept.
Touche. :P

Mushroom Ninja
2010-11-07, 01:34 AM
If you get an okay str. good wis good dex and great Con you can get an amazing ac.

Now here's part of your problem. If you need two good stats, one great stat, and one okay stat to be fully functional, you won't be able to be fully functional most of the time.

The Shadowmind
2010-11-07, 02:03 AM
Okay. Not really necessary, though, as the Swordsage isn't full BAB. (By that token, neither are the Druid and Cleric, but those two cheat anyway.)

Monk relies most of just hitting things, while swordsage has more defensive and ability attacks. The monk with the MAD needs the full bab to have an equal attack roll as the fighter(due to the lower stats from the MAD)

How is this necessary? Isn't the point of the Monk supposed to be a character who can do martial arts well? Granted, there are many martial arts that use weapons, but how is he different from a fighter or barbarian, then, who likely have the strength and armor to safely hit the enemy?
So he can flurry/attack with those weapons.

Okay, cool. Works with Flurry.


Slightly less pathetic, but still highly situational. Also, how do you justify this fluffwise? All monks are trained in HALO drops or something?
Change the ability to (Su) and say it is based on mind over matter.


The paladin has this, and that doesn't make it any more awesome.
It doesn't make the monk really strong, but the the non-magical limit is just odd, and makes a very weak ability even weaker.


Again, cool, but it kind of makes the monk simply "a guy who hits things with a sword, just faster than the fighter." In this case, he's going to end up using a greatsword or greataxe.


One of the reasons of the flurry's weapon choice is likely flavor reasons based on the common eastern monks, but just because real monks focused on certain weapons doesn't mean there couldn't be school focused in other weapons(don't you want to see a gnome with a Ranseur, monk). And he is then unarmed focused guy cutting/punching people up.

So he can run away better?
With the 1/day limit running away is about all it is good for. With a 6/day limit when you get it is for getting to that guy who is shooting you 200ft away.

Odd to make a quivering palm with a greatsword. Cutting the guy up is easy enough to do with just using a weapon. I guess it's still a good option when you grapple the other guy, though.
Rename it death strike or something, flavor is mutable after all


Touche. :P
Though all this probably won't bring monks up a tier, but it would make them a bit for functional.

Arbane
2010-11-07, 02:13 AM
Man, I want to kill someone by hitting them with a horse.

You'll need to max out your Handle Animal skill.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-07, 02:16 AM
You'll need to max out your Handle Animal skill.

would a Celestial Horse count as an Exotic weapon?

faceroll
2010-11-07, 03:33 AM
"Sigh" yet another thread like this. Is it that time of the month already? No offense but there has been thread upon thread discussing this topic...

To refute the AC point, AC becomes much less valuable later on as monsters get SLAs and casting levels which can seriously fork over your monk as most spells are wont to do too meleers.

Complain to the moderators, then. The rules here are that you can't post in old threads. Therefore, you get new threads.

BobVosh
2010-11-07, 04:17 AM
Ooh, let monks Flurry at the end of a charge? Not pounce where any attack, just Flurry ones. It makes thematic sense and boost the Speed to augment the flurry.

Personally I'm more fond of the "move up to your speed bonus and have a flurry" thing. Means they can move every round quite a bit.


Just to save time:

Giacomo: Monks are as strong as wizards with UMD and partially charged wands.

[Respected forum members]: No they are not.

Giacomo: Yes they are. You all just abuse the rules.

[Rfm]: No u

G: No u

Repeat until someone challenges G to duel, which then never happens.
You forgot the mass banning of 5-12 people

Cerlis
2010-11-07, 04:21 AM
Indeed, i posted the monk question as part of another set of questions earlier this week :) however it did not have monk in the title. :)

Iceforge
2010-11-07, 06:55 AM
I don't know if this will highlight the issue in any way, but I am currently playing a "monk" in a campaign where semi-decent optimization is taking place.

I am currently not overshining anyone, in actuality, I am slightly less powerful than the others and the following changes has been made to the monk class by the GM:

Following Class Features removed: Still Mind at 3rd level, Slow Fall entirely removed, Purity of Body at level 5, Wholeness of Body at level 7, Abudant Step at level 12, Diamond Soul at level 13, Tongue of the Sun and Moon at level 17, Empty Body at level 19
Improved Evasion and Ki Strike(Lawful) delayed 1 level each
Granted "Weapon Finess" at level 3 for free
"Mental Leap" at level 5
Wracking Palm at level 7 (Add Wis to Damage as well as Str when striking unarmed)
Up The Walls feat at level 8
Ki Strike (Silver) at level 9
Granted One Known Psionic Power pr level. Max Power Level increase to level 2 at level 4 and by 1 for every 3 levels thereafter (3rd at 7th, 4th at 10th and so on)
Power Points total is what you had previous level + max Power Level aviable at this level (1 at 1st level, 2 at 2nd level, 3 at 3rd level, 5 at 4th level and so on) + the bonus power points for high Wisdom
Psionic Fist added as possible Bonus feat at level 1
Fiery Fist added as possible Bonus feat at 2nd level
Pounce and Greater Psionic Fists added as possible Bonus feat at 6th level
Long list of possible Powers Known, but my current powers at level 5 are 1st level powers: Detect Psionics (which works excatly as Detect Magic in the current campaign), Eidetic Lock and Defensive Precognition. 2nd level powers: Biofeedback and Psinoic Lions Charge


I think it works out pretty neat, I found out that Combat Reflexes suck arse when you don't have reach as a monk (but thinking about getting a spiked chain, even with a -4 penalty for usage, it still beats having almost no additional attacks of opportunit), and Psionic Lions Charge makes me able to actually do a charge with my high speed and fire off flurry of blows.
Also my Psionic Fist ability makes me able to lash out a great deal of damage in a pitch, if I need it, althrough as I have Psionic Dodge, it does decrease my AC by 1 until I get Psionic Focus again, but those 2D6 of damage (4D6 at level 6) is pretty neat.

Edit: An usually, I would say this was not nearly as powerful still, as many other classes, but in current campaign it works, as the GM has actually gone through every single DnD book and made a list of which classes are included, which PrC's, which feats, which everything, and has made alterations to many other classes or made replacements (Clerics, for instance, as banned and replaced with Priests, which works differently, and Druids are gone.

Playable classes are: Barbarians, Beguiler, Priest, Ranged, Paladin, Fighter (which has been upgraded as well), Rogue, Knight, Soul Knife, Spirit Shaman, Swashbuckler, Wizard, Bard, Sorcerer, Samurai and Monk)

Runestar
2010-11-07, 07:20 AM
I am thinking that at higher lvs, his movement could simply simulate dim-door (ie: he can dim-door as a move action up to his speed and without the drawbacks).

Bayar
2010-11-07, 09:50 AM
would a Celestial Horse count as an Exotic weapon?

More importantly, will it deal good alligned damage ?

Starbuck_II
2010-11-07, 09:57 AM
I am thinking that at higher lvs, his movement could simply simulate dim-door (ie: he can dim-door as a move action up to his speed and without the drawbacks).

Wouldn't it be easier to say He can Teleport without error up to his move speed?

Incan Road
2010-11-07, 10:18 AM
Not true. Haven't you watched the show? He's a total germaphobe with major OCD - dude is terrified of dirt and grime.

Puns puns puns

I love monks, they are one of my favorite classes but I learned right after I made my first one that...I should have made a fighter or a rouge or a wizard. True, monks can be made to suck less with other supplement material and house rules but they still suffer from too many flaws to make their benefits work.
It is a lot like Macs. If someone has a love affair with them it doesn't matter how much you tell them it costs too much, how they can't run the best programs, games and be useful for anything but art and flavor they will never admit they sunk too much time and money into their sinking ship.

thompur
2010-11-07, 10:18 AM
Hmmm... I let fighters make a full attack as a standard action starting at 7th level. Why not give monks spring attack for free and flurry as standard action about the same time? Hmmmm

Incan Road
2010-11-07, 10:22 AM
Hmmm... I let fighters make a full attack as a standard action starting at 7th level. Why not give monks spring attack for free about the same time? Hmmmm

I ran a game where I allowed the monk to use Flurry of Blows as a standard action and it worked out and the monk made more sense. He was fast and could attack, he was Bruce Lee.

Coidzor
2010-11-07, 11:00 AM
Pa lala dins

I thought those were hulking hurlers on a budget.

Greenish
2010-11-07, 11:20 AM
To make monks better:
Increase BaB to full.
Proficiency with simple and martial weapons.
Give monks the ability to move up there land speed as a swift action.(Basically an unlimited use Travel Devotion), maybe at level 6
Slow fall-completely replaced by constant feather fall.
Purity of body, prevents magical and normal.
Allow flurry with any weapon.
Make Abundant Step, 1/2(rounded down) monk level times per day.
Quivering Palm- Daily ability instead of weakly.Man, that'd be awesome… as a two-level dip in a martial build.

Complain to the moderators, then. The rules here are that you can't post in old threads. Therefore, you get new threads.But you can read the old thread (so why make a new one to ask a question answered a million times).

Hmmm... I let fighters make a full attack as a standard action starting at 7th level. Why not give monks spring attack for free and flurry as standard action about the same time? HmmmmYou can't use a Standard action with Spring Attack. :smalltongue:

thompur
2010-11-07, 11:25 AM
Man, that'd be awesome… as a two-level dip in a martial build.
But you can read the old thread (so why make a new one to ask a question answered a million times).
You can't use a Standard action with Spring Attack. :smalltongue:

Where does it say that?

Sir Giacomo
2010-11-07, 11:25 AM
Just to save time:

Giacomo: Monks are as strong as wizards with UMD and partially charged wands.

[Respected forum members]: No they are not.

Giacomo: Yes they are. You all just abuse the rules.

[Rfm]: No u

G: No u

Repeat until someone challenges G to duel, which then never happens.

Are you implying that I am not a respected forum member ? :smallwink:

Anyhow, what can I say, dear Half-orc Bard? The reasons why a lot of people think that monks are weak are simple:
1. They overestimate what other classes can do, in particular the wizard (in particular broken interpretations of what some spells are capable of)
2. They underestimate what the monk class can do.

Just one example out of many:
"How can a melee class just have medium BAB?"
Simple.
A monk focuses more on special combat maneuvers like grapple and trip which only necessitate touch attacks (he gets the necessary feats without any requirements, which is highly useful).
Plus, at higher levels you can get the divine power spell (via UMDing a wand) and thus have full BAB. All without houseruling.

Granted, it is more difficult to design a monk than other classes (apparently).
I gradually get some people to change their views on them with many playtests and theoretical discussion. But it takes quite some time.

All the more glad I am when someone like you posts with a similar impression that monks, indeed, do not suck.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

PS: my monk guide in my sig can give you ideas what a monk can do already with just the core rules, and no, it is not about a monk allegedly making best use out of UMD (only making best use out of some buff spells) or relying on partially charged wands. Find out for yourself.
Edit: at some time in the future, though, I'll do an updated version of the monk guide reflecting the many discussions, duels and playtests since the original version.

Eldariel
2010-11-07, 11:28 AM
Where does it say that?

...right in Spring Attack? "When using the attack action with a melee weapon, you can move both before and after the attack, provided that your total distance moved is not greater than your speed. Moving in this way does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender you attack, though it might provoke attacks of opportunity from other creatures, if appropriate. You can’t use this feat if you are wearing heavy armor."

Nowhere does it allow for any other action, such as standard action, to be taken between the moves or otherwise.

Starbuck_II
2010-11-07, 12:19 PM
...right in Spring Attack? "When using the attack action with a melee weapon, you can move both before and after the attack, provided that your total distance moved is not greater than your speed. Moving in this way does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender you attack, though it might provoke attacks of opportunity from other creatures, if appropriate. You can’t use this feat if you are wearing heavy armor."

Nowhere does it allow for any other action, such as standard action, to be taken between the moves or otherwise.

Even pathfinder didn't make this clear apparently to casual gamers. Designers had to come out and say they was a difference.

thompur
2010-11-07, 12:39 PM
OKAY...I'm confused. Isn't 'attack' a standard action? In the list of standard actions on page 141 of the PHB, 'Attack(melee)' is the first action listed. Is there another definition of attack action elsewhere in the PHB? It's not on the glossery or the Index. And if an 'attack action' isn't a standard action, what kind of action is it"? What am I missing?

Terazul
2010-11-07, 12:43 PM
OKAY...I'm confused. Isn't 'attack' a standard action? In the list of standard actions on page 141 of the PHB, 'Attack(melee)' is the first action listed. Is there another definition of attack action elsewhere in the PHB? It's not on the glossery or the Index. And if an 'attack action' isn't a standard action, what kind of action is it"? What am I missing?

An attack action is a type of standard action.

A standard action is not necessarily a type of attack action.

Eldariel
2010-11-07, 12:46 PM
OKAY...I'm confused. Isn't 'attack' a standard action? In the list of standard actions on page 141 of the PHB, 'Attack(melee)' is the first action listed. Is there another definition of attack action elsewhere in the PHB? It's not on the glossery or the Index. What am I missing?

Single Attack can be made as a standard action, yes. It is one of the options you are allowed to do with a standard action. Spring Attack states you may attack. It's the only action you are allowed to take between Spring Attack movement and it's also doable as a Standard Action. Being allowed to do an action that can also be done as a Standard Action does not enable you to take anything else that could be done as a Standard Action at that point. Single Attack belongs to category Standard Action; Standard Action does not belong to the category Attack (since it's a larger category that consists of other options too).

thompur
2010-11-07, 12:48 PM
An attack action is a type of standard action.

A standard action is not necessarily a type of attack action.

Yes, I know that. My confusion comes from the quote by Greenish that implies, or at least strongly causes one to infer, that an attack action doesn't qualify as a standard action. Was there an errata that took 'Attack' out of the list of possible standard actions?

Flickerdart
2010-11-07, 12:49 PM
Note that Fly-By Attack allows you to take a standard action, Acquiring a fly speed is pretty trivial, and you save two feats - a spectacular deal.

Eldariel
2010-11-07, 12:52 PM
Yes, I know that. My confusion comes from the quote by Greenish that implies, or at least strongly causes one to infer, that an attack action doesn't qualify as a standard action. Was there an errata that took 'Attack' out of the list of possible standard actions?

No it's just...just because you can take an attack as a standard action doesn't mean you're taking a standard action when you make an attack. Heck, else full attack could be upwards to 5 standard actions which would just be all sorts of ridiculous.

thompur
2010-11-07, 12:56 PM
Single Attack can be made as a standard action, yes. It is one of the options you are allowed to do with a standard action. Spring Attack states you may attack. It's the only action you are allowed to take between Spring Attack movement and it's also doable as a Standard Action. Being allowed to do an action that can also be done as a Standard Action does not enable you to take anything else that could be done as a Standard Action at that point. Single Attack belongs to category Standard Action; Standard Action does not belong to the category Attack (since it's a larger category that consists of other options too).

AHHH. I see the confusion. My fault. I wasn't clear enough in my post regarding my houserule about monks, flurry of blows, and spring attack. I would allow monks to count flurry of blows as a standard action, and treat it as a single attack for purposes of spring attack. The intent being to utilize two of the monks class features, movement and flurry, and let them work together, rather than not.

mostlyharmful
2010-11-07, 02:34 PM
The problem ISN'T that Monks suck. It's that they don't do what it says on the tin and what it says on the tin is funky-awesomesauce. Lots of the posters/optimizers would love to play a hardass ninja face poundin' sage kung fu madman. It's just that Monk is not that chance. Also, hence the love of Swordsage for all your asskicking needs.:smallcool:

Sir Giacomo
2010-11-07, 03:28 PM
The problem ISN'T that Monks suck. It's that they don't do what it says on the tin and what it says on the tin is funky-awesomesauce. Lots of the posters/optimizers would love to play a hardass ninja face poundin' sage kung fu madman. It's just that Monk is not that chance.

Well, I would not say that. I think a level 20 monk transcends by far what kung fu/wuxia movies show (I mean, a monk talking to a tree? Killing an elephant with one hit? Never getting old? Disappearing from this reality altogeter? COME ON! :smallbiggrin:).


Also, hence the love of Swordsage for all your asskicking needs.:smallcool:

Yes, that swordsage thing. And talashatora (or whatever it is called). Just two nice examples of how broken or badly done non-core things can get. The unarmed swordsage ToB one-sentence-class suggestion basically says: "Here, DM, go and just boost the monk class by doing gestalt swordsage/monk." And the talashatora feat basically does the same with psionic and monk.
Not really that necessary imo.

- Giacomo

Susano-wo
2010-11-07, 04:03 PM
no, one sentance sword sage suggestion says that swordsage, specifcially the unrrmed variant suggestion, does what monks are supposedly desigend to do better.

disagree if you want, but lets represent things fairly. Talashatora does seem to be (possibly)hax, though. But what exactly does it add? I assume its more than just monk unarmed damage

Greenish
2010-11-07, 04:07 PM
Yes, that swordsage thing. And talashatora (or whatever it is called). Just two nice examples of how broken or badly done non-core things can get. The unarmed swordsage ToB one-sentence-class suggestion basically says: "Here, DM, go and just boost the monk class by doing gestalt swordsage/monk." And the talashatora feat basically does the same with psionic and monk.So the unarmed damage is the only thing monks got going for themselves, even according to you. :smallamused:

[Edit]: Tashatalora allows the selected psionic class to progress monk's unarmed damage, flurry and AC bonus.

Curmudgeon
2010-11-07, 04:10 PM
Everyone says that monks suck. I don't see why. With the Fist of the forest PrC In complete champion you can add you con to your AC. If you get an okay str. good wis good dex and great Con you can get an amazing ac.
Please note that AC Bonus from Monk and Fist of the Forest don't stack together. It's the source name that matters here, not the attribute referenced.
Different named bonus types all stack, but usually a named bonus does not stack with another bonus of the same name, except for dodge bonuses and some circumstance bonuses.
Does the Armor Class bonus ability from the monk, swordsage, and ninja stack?
No, each of these abilities provides the same bonus. You are not able to benefit from multiple sources that have the same name more then once. The name of the source is AC Bonus in each case.

Susano-wo
2010-11-07, 04:12 PM
So the unarmed damage is the only thing monks got going for themselves, even according to you. :smallamused:

[Edit]: Tashatalora allows the selected psionic class to progress monk's unarmed damage, flurry and AC bonus.

yeah, that does seem a little much. or maybe it undescores how unvalued the monks class features came to be. poor monk.:smallsigh:

is that complete psionics?

Greenish
2010-11-07, 04:14 PM
yeah, that does seem a little much. or maybe it undescores how unvalued the monks class features came to be. poor monk.:smallsigh:

is that complete psionics?Secrets of Sarlona.

Coidzor
2010-11-07, 04:27 PM
yeah, that does seem a little much. or maybe it undescores how unvalued the monks class features came to be. poor monk.:smallsigh:

is that complete psionics?

Really, the monk needs a mercy-killing more than pity. Far more merciful.

Keld Denar
2010-11-07, 04:29 PM
Tash is what a monk should have been. Using your mind to augement your body and the space and time around you. It would allow much more customization and varied playability. Instead, monk shoe-horns you into a bunch of lackluster and often 1/day spell-like abilities that really limit your options.

Take the Sun School tactical feat. One of the coolest things it does is gives you a 1-hit tele-pounce. A traditional monk20 could only use it once per day, because he gets his Dimension Door ability only once per day, and WAY late. A Tashed out PsyWar or Ardent or even a Psion or Erudite gets Psionic Dim Door, which they can use multiple times per day, PP permitting. Its not only BETTER, but its more versatile, customizable, and argueable...fun. I don't want to be forced to play like the Devs wanted me to play, I want to play how I want to play. Monk as written doesn't allow that. I'd consider Tash and UA Swordsage to be monk fixes as official as anything.

Monk just wasn't very well designed. Its ok to admit it. It doesn't make a player any worse of a player to play something similar, yet different. If it makes him enjoy the experience more, then it must be a GOOD thing, not a bad thing, right?

And cross-class ranks in UMD is not a class feature...

Susano-wo
2010-11-07, 04:33 PM
Secrets of Sarlona.

thanks. I plan to ebay/amazon complete psionics sometime, cand it'll save me the pain of looking for a feat that aint there. what else does SoS have to offer? is it a mostly region flavor sourcebook?

Psyren
2010-11-07, 04:35 PM
yeah, that does seem a little much. or maybe it undescores how unvalued the monks class features came to be. poor monk.:smallsigh:

is that complete psionics?

I see it more as Keith Baker looking at monks and saying "90% of people who want to play a monk, only really want these three things - punching monsters to death, lots of attacks, and not wearing armor. So lets take those three things and attach them to a psychic warrior to handle the other cool stuff from fiction."

And so Tashalatora was born. And now your monk can go up walls, run really fast and all the other stuff, only without sucking in a fight. The flavor of psionics and ki was already interchangeable anyway.


thanks. I plan to ebay/amazon complete psionics sometime, cand it'll save me the pain of looking for a feat that aint there. what else does SoS have to offer? is it a mostly region flavor sourcebook?

SoS is invaluable for a psionic eberron campaign, as it provides you with the full Eberron spin on the XPH races (including Elans, Maenads etc.)

But it's a pretty nice book even outside an Eberron game. For one thing, it converts a lot of nifty spells to psionic powers; including gems like Prestidigitation, Glibness and Shrink Item. (Yay, psions get the tinfoil hat!)

Keld Denar
2010-11-07, 04:43 PM
Mechanics-wise, Secrets of Sarlona doesn't have a WHOLE lot else to offer. The Spinning Sword is a 1-handed, 1d8 alternative to the Spiked Chain (2handed) and the Kusiri-Gama (Light), so that can be kinda fun for a sword + board style Crusader who wants a reach weapon and can't afford a +1 Animated shield yet. Other than that, most of the other exotic weapons are kinda crappy. There is a feat in there that lets you flurry with pole-arms, which is kinda fun if you are into that kinda thing.

Fluff-wise, it has a TON of information about Sarlona, Adar, Riedra, the Quori and all that jazz. Great if you want to set an adventure in Sarlona, its a pretty immersive setting.

ScionoftheVoid
2010-11-07, 04:50 PM
Well, I would not say that. I think a level 20 monk transcends by far what kung fu/wuxia movies show (I mean, a monk talking to a tree? Killing an elephant with one hit? Never getting old? Disappearing from this reality altogeter? COME ON! :smallbiggrin:).

Yes, because talking to things without sentience, doing what other classes can also do with a little investment and halting aging are so amazing![/sarcasm] High-level D&D in general far surpasses what many movies show. The only one of those that's actually useful is the last one, and then only because it means you don't have 20 levels in Monk any more.


Yes, that swordsage thing. And talashatora (or whatever it is called). Just two nice examples of how broken or badly done non-core things can get.

Sorry? Tashalatora and the Unarmed Swordsage are often considered the go-to Monk fixes. Objectively the two are certainly more able to keep up with the more useful classes than straight Monk could hope to be, at the same level of effort.


The unarmed swordsage ToB one-sentence-class suggestion basically says: "Here, DM, go and just boost the monk class by doing gestalt swordsage/monk."

The Unarmed Swordsage, if what I've heard is correct, is far more than a one-line suggestion, and basically just gives Monk Unarmed Strike Damage instead of actual weapon proficiencies (which is probably a bad trade-off anyway). It certainly doesn't give the Monk's useless and mutually exclusive baggage class features in addition to those of the Swordsage (thank goodness). For the one-sentence suggestion you may be thinking of the Arcane Swordsage (or something similar), something about spells-as-maneuvers.


And the talashatora feat basically does the same with psionic and monk.

Now that is slightly more accurate, but I believe the feat is easiest to use with a small Monk dip. It is definitely the more powerful of the two, but that merely means it keeps up to casters more easily.


Not really that necessary imo.

Whilst you may be happy to ignore many of the the spells in the PHB, the system's balance issues and (in some cases) common sense, many of us would like to do that as little as possible. It is easier to forget about the Monk as anything other than a two-level dip than to forget that its class features amount to a more expensive but less effective weapon, a weakened version of a first-level spell (over twenty levels, no less!), a third-level spell and a bit at 17th level (with no thematic or mechanical synergy), incredibly rare uses of spells (gained several levels after the Sorcerer gets them and with little to no scaling in numbers of uses) and a few defensive class features which a Rogue could also get (as well as being more effective with their fists, being less pathetic with any other weapon choice and having UMD as a class skill so that what the Monk wastes on the higher prices for enhancing his armour and weapon the Rogue can use to get more frequent and better spells than the Monk does) and that many classes in Core get better than that (such as the Rogue). I don't know why you get so worked up about non-Core material, considering that many things in Core are wildly unbalanced and that there are multiple classes which are pretty much just better than the Monk even at the game of "hit it without a proper weapon" (Rogue, Druid, Cleric, Barbarian, Rogue, possibly Fighter, Wizard and Sorcerer with some more work).

Stallion
2010-11-07, 04:52 PM
Wizard monk enlightened fist abjurant champion, dex based, with the vow of poverty is actually pretty decent.


That's sort of a gish monk, though.

ScionoftheVoid
2010-11-07, 04:54 PM
Wizard monk enlightened fist abjurant champion, dex based, with the vow of poverty is actually pretty decent.

Only if you find a way to function without a spellbook and spell component pouch, VoP doesn't allow either, AFAIK.

Keld Denar
2010-11-07, 04:56 PM
You could do that better with Psionics. The problem with arcane monks is that there is no feat like Tashalatora for advancing monk features with an arcane class. Thus, you are stuck in one of a couple of PrCs or forced to lose out on one feature or another. Then again, it wouldn't be hard to refluff Tash for arcane. I think you could have a great deal of fun with an unarmed Monk2/Duskblade18 with an arcane version of Tash.

Psyren
2010-11-07, 05:13 PM
Agreed - psionics is the way to go if you want casting, monk-itude and VoP.

The fluff is a better fit as well; even WotC themselves see more of a parallel between ki and psionics than ki and magic (arcane or divine).

FMArthur
2010-11-07, 07:07 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again: the worst part about Unarmed Swordsage and Tashalatora is not that they give you everything you'd play a Monk for. It's that they aren't even exceptionally powerful options. Practically speaking, a Monk's unarmed damage is a mediocre but flavorful trade for martial weapon proficiency, and the AC bonus is similarly comparable to heavy armor and shield proficiency. These are the Monk's main class features we're talking about here.

Keld Denar
2010-11-07, 07:17 PM
Unarmed Strike damage scales in a wonky way past about 4d6, and being both a natural weapon and a weapon you can make iteratives with, size stacking is the most popular way to boost damage. Ease at stacking size is contrasted by difficulty of getting enhancements. Its a trade-off, but most of the time not a terrible trade off.

true_shinken
2010-11-07, 07:25 PM
The Unarmed Swordsage, if what I've heard is correct, is far more than a one-line suggestion, and basically just gives Monk Unarmed Strike Damage instead of actual weapon proficiencies (which is probably a bad trade-off anyway).
...it is a one-line suggestion. Just saying.

Gametime
2010-11-07, 08:05 PM
It's a one-sentence suggestion, but as written in the book it is a four-line (or, more properly, three-and-a-bit-line) suggestion. :smalltongue:

AslanCross
2010-11-07, 08:13 PM
Yes, that swordsage thing. And talashatora (or whatever it is called). Just two nice examples of how broken or badly done non-core things can get. The unarmed swordsage ToB one-sentence-class suggestion basically says: "Here, DM, go and just boost the monk class by doing gestalt swordsage/monk." And the talashatora feat basically does the same with psionic and monk.
Not really that necessary imo.

- Giacomo

Are you saying that just because they can do what the Monk is supposed to do better, they're broken? (And just remember, a lot of the broken spells/items/options ARE in core. Candle of Invocation, for one--it isn't even a Wizard-exclusive thing, and you cannot discount that it CAN give infinite recursive abuse)

The Unarmed Swordsage loses its armor proficiency and gains the Monk's unarmed strike progression. That's it. It does not gain any of the Monk's abilities (the best of which are actually the requirement-bypassing bonus feats, which are the reason I always recommend Monk 2/Unarmed Swordsage X).

Tash gets slightly more (AC bonus, flurry of blows, unarmed strike).

Neither Unarmed Swordsage nor Tashalatora grant the Monk's bonus feats, or good save progression.

awa
2010-11-07, 09:08 PM
arguing with Giacomo is pointless you wont convince him he wont convince you. everything you are about to say has been said a million times before in all the previous monk threads all of his arguments will also appear along with their numerous refutations rehashing them wont do anyone any good.

Kallisti
2010-11-07, 09:15 PM
Just to save time:

Giacomo: Monks are as strong as wizards with UMD and partially charged wands.

[Respected forum members]: No they are not.

Giacomo: Yes they are. You all just abuse the rules.

[Rfm]: No u

G: No u

Repeat until someone challenges G to duel, which then never happens.

Oh, hey, Sir Giacomo's here! Hi, Sir Giacomo!

And he's already been shouted down by the Playground at large. We're right on schedule!

In the spirit of punctuality...

Sir Giacomo! *Throws down +1 Flaming Handwrappings* I challenge you to a vaguely-defined playtest duel that will turn into a regular campaign when both you and I disappear, leaving the monk issue completely unresolved and guaranteeing another monk thread will appear next week, at which point the cycle will repeat itself!

What say you, sirrah? Have you the courage to promise you will face me, only to bow out, which I will not call you on because I was about to announce my own withdrawal?

AslanCross
2010-11-07, 10:53 PM
arguing with Giacomo is pointless you wont convince him he wont convince you. everything you are about to say has been said a million times before in all the previous monk threads all of his arguments will also appear along with their numerous refutations rehashing them wont do anyone any good.

Sigh, you're right. I don't even know why I decided to reply to a Monk thread this time. Oh well.

Sir Giacomo
2010-11-08, 02:15 AM
It probably helps to clarify some misunderstandings:

- I like non-core material (not all of it, but certainly ToB).
- similarly, I like many of the non-core options for the monk class.
- this includes options like the unarmed swordsage (provided the DM is willing to do some houseruling) and the talashatora feat (hope I spelled that right). Much like other ways to combine psionics/spellcasting with monk abilities, such as prestige classes.

But it has to be acknowledged that these options create more powerful characters. This may be interesting fluffwise, but it is increasingly more difficult for a DM to keep things balanced, the more non-core material you add.

For power reasons, imo you do not need non-core material. The monk is able to fulfill all expectations of a fantasy unarmed fighting class mechanically, with just the core class abilities, fears, equipment and long-term npc buffs.
For instance, having a good chance to overcome all CR appropriate challenges for the respective levels 1-20.

- Giacomo

Psyren
2010-11-08, 02:39 AM
The monk is able to fulfill all expectations of a fantasy unarmed fighting class mechanically, with just the core class abilities, fears, equipment and long-term npc buffs.

Isn't the fact that it relies on benefits its own class cannot provide to be effective, evidence of its inability to fulfill those expectations?

Gear is one thing, but at least you don't lose its benefits (not permanently, anyway) with a timely dispel.

Keld Denar
2010-11-08, 02:41 AM
Its been said before, but I'll say it again. Non-core closes the gap between casters and non-casters more than it widens it. Casters already have immense power and versatility in core. Stepping outside of core broadens that a little, but in terms of order of magnitude, its very small.

Non-core helps out everyone else a TON though. Rangers are terrible, almost as bad as monks, but if you add some spells in SpC and Champions of Ruin, they are all of a sudden decent, and if you use the Mystic Ranger progression from a dragon magazine, they are all of a sudden a gish in a can. GREAT class, and certainly an improvement form core.

And just like you said, Tashalatora (<<< correct spelling btw) makes for a stronger monk than core only. My question for you is, is this so bad? Core only is the harshest environment for monks (and bards to a slightly lesser degree), but outside of there they get OPTIONS that allow them to do things OTHER than the unfocused haphazard abilities they have allow them. Is it so bad to bring the lowest tier up a couple pegs? Tash is suggested, is popular, because it WORKS. UA Swordsage is popular because it gives you options, and makes you GOOD at those options.

olentu
2010-11-08, 02:50 AM
Its been said before, but I'll say it again. Non-core closes the gap between casters and non-casters more than it widens it. Casters already have immense power and versatility in core. Stepping outside of core broadens that a little, but in terms of order of magnitude, its very small.

Non-core helps out everyone else a TON though. Rangers are terrible, almost as bad as monks, but if you add some spells in SpC and Champions of Ruin, they are all of a sudden decent, and if you use the Mystic Ranger progression from a dragon magazine, they are all of a sudden a gish in a can. GREAT class, and certainly an improvement form core.

And just like you said, Tashalatora (<<< correct spelling btw) makes for a stronger monk than core only. My question for you is, is this so bad? Core only is the harshest environment for monks (and bards to a slightly lesser degree), but outside of there they get OPTIONS that allow them to do things OTHER than the unfocused haphazard abilities they have allow them. Is it so bad to bring the lowest tier up a couple pegs? Tash is suggested, is popular, because it WORKS. UA Swordsage is popular because it gives you options, and makes you GOOD at those options.

Clearly core is not a problem since there is no possible way that core could be anything but completely balanced between classes.

Anything else would be preposterous.

Eloel
2010-11-08, 02:55 AM
For instance, having a good chance to overcome all CR appropriate challenges for the respective levels 1-20.


This made my day, thank you.

JaronK
2010-11-08, 03:09 AM
If I were "fixing" the Monk (which I generally wouldn't just because I think Unarmed Swordsage did it so well) without using ToB or Psionics (because official version already did that) I'd fix the following issues:

1: Monks have no real role... they're not good enough in melee to be a proper warrior, and good saves are nice but that's really all they have.

2: They have no good class features past level 11. Seriously, what the heck?

3: Their class features don't work well together. Fast movement and bonuses to attack when standing still? Really?

But I don't mind the MAD too much, as long as they're strong in other areas. So I think I'd give the following:

Full BAB, which helps with the striking thing.

Superior Flurry in the higher levels (16 or so, gives a third bonus attack). Flurry gives bonus attacks any time you attack, even if you're only doing a standard action attack or a charging attack.

Quivering Palm is now a standard action touch attack that does one hit for double damage with unarmed strikes only, and you can't flurry with it, but if you hit you may at any time as a swift action force a save or die on that opponent (Fort Save DC 10+ 1/2 Monk Level + Wis Modifier). You can only do this on the last opponent hit with a Quivering Palm, and once used you have to hit with the attack again before using the swift action kill. Possibly this ability should level up, starting as a normal attack for normal damage (but with the kill effect) and gaining power over time. It can be used as many times as you want per day (the cost of course is that you can't flurry or full attack, so you don't actually do as much damage).

You may enchant your unarmed strikes as a weapon using an ability similar to the OA Samurai or Ancestral Relic ability, and may explicitly TWF with them while using the enchantment effect. Furthermore, you may change your selections of bonuses each time you level up. You can add these enchantment bonuses to any Monk weapon you wield so long as that weapon is not magical.

Monk weapons include all weapons currently listed in their proficiencies (plus unarmed strike!), and then at levels 7, 14, and 20 you can add new thematic weapon groups, choosing from a few mastery groups. For example, Mastery of the Striking Snake gives proficiency in Spiked Chains, Spinning Swords, Chains, Kusari Gamas, Meteor Hammers, and Rope Darts. Mastery of the Pillars of Heaven gives Longstaff, Glaive, Guisarme, and Awl Pike. Mastery of the Dragon's Fang gives Dagger, Kukri, Punching Dagger, Barbed Dagger, and Broadblade Shortsword. All such weapons can be flurried with, and enchanted using the rules above.

Monks gain supernatural abilities as they level up. One ability might be to become incorporeal or ethereal for your class level rounds at a time. I'm not really a fan of use per day abilities, so have some kind of reset timer that's reasonable (once per encounter, or maybe once per minute). Another ability might be walking on air (yes, I think the Swordsage ones were good ideas). An ability to stay with an opponent no matter where they go might be cool... perhaps the opponent (who you threaten) must make a reflex save (10+ 1/2 Monk level + Wis mod) any time they move, and if they fail the Monk just stays with them, moving to the nearest space that still threatens them. After all, Monks are theoretically mage killers... let's make that actually possible.

Result of all this? They'd actually be kinda dangerous. Which they should be.

JaronK

RebelRogue
2010-11-08, 03:37 AM
Monk is just bad as is. In all games I've played IRL, the superiority of full casters has been less than impressive in practice. Sure, nobody played them to their full cheesy potential or über-paranoid, but it all played out ok. However, I have been in no game (save for gestalt) where dedicated monks didn't suck, pure and simple! Can you improve on them by buffing them? Of course, but that doesn't mean the class is good as is.

tl;dr: to me monk suckage in 3.5 is a way stronger supported fact than caster superiority, regardless of optimisation level.

absolmorph
2010-11-08, 04:51 AM
Monk is just bad as is. In all games I've played IRL, the superiority of full casters has been less than impressive in practice. Sure, nobody played them to their full cheesy potential or über-paranoid, but it all played out ok. However, I have been in no game (save for gestalt) where dedicated monks didn't suck, pure and simple! Can you improve on them by buffing them? Of course, but that doesn't mean the class is good as is.

tl;dr: to me monk suckage in 3.5 is a way stronger supported fact than caster superiority, regardless of optimisation level.
One of the key things about a well-played caster is that they don't need to stand out. You can play the guy who does all the major damage without attacking once.
But the wizard dropping all the enemies with Glitterdust, allowing the mundane characters to beat on them with minimal danger, or uses Grease to make enemies flat-footed so the rogue can get a bunch of Sneak Attacks?
Yeah, his disabling is doing more effective damage than the fighter, barbarian or rogue would do alone. And people aren't gonna think to hard about it, because the fighter, barbarian and rogue are the ones rolling all the dice. The wizard just casts a spell or two, then buffs the other guys.
Because he's a goddamn wizard.

Sir Giacomo
2010-11-08, 04:53 AM
At the heart of our differences probably is

- I see it as no weakness for a non-caster to buy stuff that creates synergy with its class abilities and get buffs, all of which can be destroyed and dispelled. Much like what happens to what the wizard buys and buffs.
- I see core as way more balanced than non-core. Sure non-casters get more options and thus get more powerful. But casters get the game-breaking swift and immediate actions, celerity, ultra-powerful prestige classes etc. Have a look at the typical recommendations of spells and spell combos for, say, wizards: the vast majority is non-core.

But I'll think some more on these issues.

- Giacomo

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-08, 05:09 AM
I see it as no weakness for a non-caster to buy stuff that creates synergy with its class abilities and get buffs, all of which can be destroyed and dispelled. Much like what happens to what the wizard buys and buffs.

when a wizard buffs using his own class features it is the class that is good. when a Monk buffs using a magic item an NPC wizard (or other caster that makes magic-items) that any class can get (and better if they have the UMD class skill) then it's the system that is good. a Monk is underpowered due to it's self-defeating class features and need for cross-class UMD to be good.


I see core as way more balanced than non-core. Sure non-casters get more options and thus get more powerful. But casters get the game-breaking swift and immediate actions, celerity, ultra-powerful prestige classes etc. Have a look at the typical recommendations of spells and spell combos for, say, wizards: the vast majority is non-core.

casters get game-breaking actions in core. non-core gives non-casters more bang for their buck and while it also does it to a lesser extent with casters i think it lessens the disparity between the Tiers.

Myth
2010-11-08, 08:24 AM
To actually fix a Monk I'd:

1. Allow them to make uninterpretable Grapples with a "no not even then" clause that makes them stick on the Wizard even if FoM or a similar effect triggers.
2. Give them Full BAB.
3. Give them damage progression past lvl 16 and into Epic.
4. Give them better SR.
5. Give them Immediate action immunity to a specific type of Energy x times/day.
6. Give them complete invulnerability for x rounds 1/day (auto win saves+disregard any damage/negative levels/whatever) triggered as a Standard action at level 20.

Sure they'd still suck arse when it comes to utility and mobility but they'd be scary in a fight, esp with splatbook feats (pierce magical protection/concealment) and some items and UMD.

RebelRogue
2010-11-08, 08:33 AM
One of the key things about a well-played caster is that they don't need to stand out. You can play the guy who does all the major damage without attacking once.
But the wizard dropping all the enemies with Glitterdust, allowing the mundane characters to beat on them with minimal danger, or uses Grease to make enemies flat-footed so the rogue can get a bunch of Sneak Attacks?
Yeah, his disabling is doing more effective damage than the fighter, barbarian or rogue would do alone. And people aren't gonna think to hard about it, because the fighter, barbarian and rogue are the ones rolling all the dice. The wizard just casts a spell or two, then buffs the other guys.
Because he's a goddamn wizard.
I know: I played a battlefield control wizard in some of those games to great effect. It's just that people speak a lot about paladins, fighters and rangers being useless, but I've never seen that to happen (at least not consistently - sure there might be a power gap, but they're still contributing important stuff). Monks on the other hand, have always been sucky.

dsmiles
2010-11-08, 08:39 AM
I gotta tell you, I like monks. I use monks. I've never had any problems with monks not contributing. As long as you're having fun with your monk, you're not doing it wrong.

Callista
2010-11-08, 08:39 AM
The monk actually doesn't suck in our game because we are all average power, low level, and still single-classed. The improved movement speed has come in handy SO many times. But then again, that may be unique to our group, because we tend to bravely run away from a lot of stuff. It's kind of a status quo world where we never know whether we can take something on. (This makes my character's knowledge skills a lot more powerful than they would otherwise be, as well.) He's also used grapple to shut down enemy spellcasters on multiple occasions, which has literally saved the entire party at least once. The fellow playing the monk knows his character will be weaker as we level up, so he's going to PrCs as soon as he can; but all in all, it hasn't actually been as bad as the reputation of monks says it should be. It might help that we've been weakened by being at least three levels behind the usual party wealth, which affects the fighter types but not the monk.

RebelRogue
2010-11-08, 08:46 AM
I like the monk as an idea too (generally, some of my favorite classes are 'melee-ers with interesting fluff attached', like rangers, paladins and monks), and I'm not trying to say you're doing something wrong if you enjoy playing your character. Not at all! But objectively, the rules for the monk are just lacking, as have been demonstrated over and over.

Actually, I think one of the coolest characters I've seen in play (which the player had a lot of fun with too), was a gestalt Monk/Barbarian (we didn't care about the alignment dissonance) - our very first gestalt game, so it's probably pretty low on the overall powerscale, but man that was a blast for all involved.

Myth
2010-11-08, 08:47 AM
The monk actually doesn't suck in our game because we are all average power, low level, and still single-classed. The improved movement speed has come in handy SO many times. But then again, that may be unique to our group, because we tend to bravely run away from a lot of stuff. It's kind of a status quo world where we never know whether we can take something on. (This makes my character's knowledge skills a lot more powerful than they would otherwise be, as well.) He's also used grapple to shut down enemy spellcasters on multiple occasions, which has literally saved the entire party at least once. The fellow playing the monk knows his character will be weaker as we level up, so he's going to PrCs as soon as he can; but all in all, it hasn't actually been as bad as the reputation of monks says it should be. It might help that we've been weakened by being at least three levels behind the usual party wealth, which affects the fighter types but not the monk.

I reckon you guys don't have a plain old Druid at the very least? Or you have a Wizard that uses only Fireball and Magic Missiles and a Healbot cleric?

Also, enemy casters being grappled, it seems you have a lenient DM. Freedom of Movement, Flight, Etheralnessness, spells with no Somatic component all ruin your grapple attempts just fine.

Sir Swindle89
2010-11-08, 09:21 AM
okay I'm wondering if there are hand wrappings in other games making it able to put magic weapon enchantments on your unarmed strike. That might of tiped the scale a little bit.

Yes, it's called a house rule and every group i have ever played with allows them.

No, it still doesn't really matter.

Yes, there is a 3rd party book that have an unarmed demon lord with enchanted hand wraps and the books gives rules for them. Was the book of fiends or somthing like that if you really need a book reference rather than just a house rule.

Mushroom Ninja
2010-11-08, 09:23 AM
Have a look at the typical recommendations of spells and spell combos for, say, wizards: the vast majority is non-core.


But then again we could look at the typical recommendations for feat and PrC choices for, say, a fighter or monk: the vast majority are non-core.

Psyren
2010-11-08, 09:28 AM
- I see it as no weakness for a non-caster to buy stuff that creates synergy with its class abilities and get buffs, all of which can be destroyed and dispelled. Much like what happens to what the wizard buys and buffs.

The difference is that (a) the Wizard can still function without his items and (b) he doesn't need another wizard to rebuff him.


- I see core as way more balanced than non-core.

I was tempted to just write "LOL" here and leave it at that... actually, to stave off another 20-page thread I think I will.

Callista
2010-11-08, 09:42 AM
I reckon you guys don't have a plain old Druid at the very least? Or you have a Wizard that uses only Fireball and Magic Missiles and a Healbot cleric?

Also, enemy casters being grappled, it seems you have a lenient DM. Freedom of Movement, Flight, Etheralnessness, spells with no Somatic component all ruin your grapple attempts just fine.I'm playing a wizard; but we're only fifth level at the moment, and usually that means there's one Fireball a day and one Haste. Having less gold than usual, the number of scrolls and such I can craft isn't very high, and the library where I used to buy and copy new spells into my wizard's spellbook has been recently destroyed. At this point the party warlock is outperforming the wizard simply because there's no limit for him. We don't have access to 4th-level spells yet; neither do most of the enemy casters.

We managed to get a surprise round, and win initiative, during the encounter where our monk shut down the enemy casters. I agree that our DM wasn't playing them as well as he could have (this was not his fault; we weren't supposed to fight them in the first place, but he really should've predicted that a mostly-G party wasn't going to want to ally with devils). For one thing, he shouldn't have let us get into melee range during negotiations. But once you're grappled by a monk who is trying to stop you from speaking, Verbal-only spells aren't even a sure thing.

Personally, if I had been playing the enemy wizard, I would have gone for a Silenced Dimension Door out of the grapple to long range and thrown a Fireball or Cloudkill if I had it; but I think the caster didn't have the spell prepared, or the caster didn't have 5th-level spells (or enough of them to consider an escape spell of this sort). I think the enemy caster might've been 8th level (we were 4th at the time), which would fit with that theory. I do know that the enemy wizard definitely failed at least one concentration check to cast a spell, which was probably a lucky thing for us--it very likely was Dimension Door, and he very likely would have followed it with a Fireball.

The key here was probably low level. Upon further analysis: If that spellcaster had been even 9th level, we'd have been toast, grapple-specialized monk or not.

Greenish
2010-11-08, 11:35 AM
It might help that we've been weakened by being at least three levels behind the usual party wealth, which affects the fighter types but not the monk.Wait, what? Monks need magical items the same as other non-casters, theirs are just more expensive.

true_shinken
2010-11-08, 11:46 AM
Wait, what? Monks need magical items the same as other non-casters, theirs are just more expensive.

Remember they are low op and low level.

thompur
2010-11-08, 12:09 PM
Monks gain supernatural abilities as they level up. One ability might be to become incorporeal or ethereal for your class level rounds at a time. I'm not really a fan of use per day abilities, so have some kind of reset timer that's reasonable (once per encounter, or maybe once per minute). Another ability might be walking on air (yes, I think the Swordsage ones were good ideas). An ability to stay with an opponent no matter where they go might be cool... perhaps the opponent (who you threaten) must make a reflex save (10+ 1/2 Monk level + Wis mod) any time they move, and if they fail the Monk just stays with them, moving to the nearest space that still threatens them. After all, Monks are theoretically mage killers... let's make that actually possible.

Result of all this? They'd actually be kinda dangerous. Which they should be.

JaronK

JaronK: Why not make it rounds per day, minimum one round per use. Wouldn't that allieviate the uses per day issue, and not have to worry about resets? Just a thought...

dsmiles
2010-11-08, 12:16 PM
The difference is that (a) the Wizard can still function without his items and (b) he doesn't need another wizard to rebuff him.

Unless he gets his spellbook stolen, then he's got to work only with what he's already got memorized. :smalltongue:

Callista
2010-11-08, 12:19 PM
Unless he gets his spellbook stolen, then he's got to work only with what he's already got memorized. :smalltongue:
...which has also happened, actually.

Wizard minus spellbook = sad wizard. At least until he can access his hidden backup spellbook.

true_shinken
2010-11-08, 12:36 PM
...which has also happened, actually.

Wizard minus spellbook = sad wizard. At least until he can access his hidden backup spellbook.

This makes for awesome adventures.
If solo, the wizard now acts like a 2nd edition Wizard. He needs to be lot more careful with his resources, specially if he is on the run and does not know when he'll prepare spells again. Kinda like the drow priestesses in War of the Spider Queen.
In a party, the wizard will hang back and allow other people to do their work. Kinda like Elminster in Hell or something like that.

dsmiles
2010-11-08, 12:38 PM
This makes for awesome adventures.
If solo, the wizard now acts like a 2nd edition Wizard. He needs to be lot more careful with his resources, specially if he is on the run and does not know when he'll prepare spells again. Kinda like the drow priestesses in War of the Spider Queen.
In a party, the wizard will hang back and allow other people to do their work. Kinda like Elminster in Hell or something like that.

It keeps those uppity wizards in check. :smallcool:

Sir Swindle89
2010-11-08, 12:48 PM
Unless he gets his spellbook stolen, then he's got to work only with what he's already got memorized. :smalltongue:

Thats why you keep a few spells tattooed on, just in case.

"I don't have a spell book but i did prepare shivering touch 16 times!"

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-08, 12:50 PM
Look, I like monks. There's no one better to run an obstacle course, win a marathon, or sneak into a castle and assassinate someone (while unarmed, no less, so fewer witnesses suspect you), and there's more to them than unarmed strike and flurry of blows. All good saves? No other class has that. Innate spell resistance? Evasion? Ability to walk through walls? Immunity to aging, poison, and disease? Slow fall/wall walking? Wholeness of body? Ability to communicate to any living thing, without using a spell slot? ETHEREALNESS?
Some classes have one or two of those, but all of them?

That said, I think we can all agree that while the monk is powerful, and, when played properly, can fulfil multiple roles in the party (trapsringer, scout, combatant, healer, face, and more), he'll never be as powerful as the druid. :smallbiggrin:

Tytalus
2010-11-08, 12:55 PM
Just one example out of many:
"How can a melee class just have medium BAB?"
Simple.
A monk focuses more on special combat maneuvers like grapple and trip which only necessitate touch attacks (he gets the necessary feats without any requirements, which is highly useful).


Perhaps this is where the confusion comes from. If you think that grappling merely involves BAB in the initial attack (the touch attack), then I could see your point. However, that isn't the case at all. BAB is an important part of the Grapple Check. Without a good grapple check, it's completely irrelevant that you hit that initial touch attack.

Clearly, aside from the free feat perhaps (note that you have to give up the free Stunning Fist in the process, which is also very useful), monks make considerably worse grapplers than any of the full BAB classes. Even more so when you consider the monk's MAD; other melee characters are much more likely to have a high strength. And grappling is supposed to be a monk's "thing".

As for tripping, it looks quite a bit better here, but MAD is still a problem. And even though it's a touch attack, full BAB classes do that better, of course. They can even trip at reach range (guisarme) without having to burn a feat and giving up a main class feature (i.e., giving up unarmed damage by wielding such a weapon). Again, free feat aside (note that you have to wait until level 6 and give up Improved Disarm for it), full BAB classes make better trippers, too.



Plus, at higher levels you can get the divine power spell (via UMDing a wand) and thus have full BAB. All without houseruling.


Without house-ruling, but at significant costs.

Each activation costs 420gp, which may or may not be affordable. At level 12, for example, said wand takes up almost a quarter of your wealth - that seems a bit much for something that makes you merely comparable to other melee classes.

Worse is the cost of 1-3 standard actions (with UMD being a cross-class skill, it's not possible to guarantee success in activating the wand - unless perhaps the last levels, if you invest heavily in it) per combat. You might well be missing the decisive rounds of combat trying to get that magic stick to work that makes you useful.

You also have to spend 2 skill points each level, and have to have a high CHA (increasing MAD even further) to improve your chances.

Doesn't sound like like an obvious choice at all.

true_shinken
2010-11-08, 12:56 PM
All good saves? No other class has that.
Favored Soul does get that... and full spellcasting. It's still not a tier 1, even then.


Innate spell resistance? Evasion? Ability to walk through walls? Immunity to aging, poison, and disease? Slow fall/wall walking? Wholeness of body? Ability to communicate to any living thing, without using a spell slot? ETHEREALNESS?
Some classes have one or two of those, but all of them?
Ever heard of the big five? They have all of that.
Wizard gets all of that... and a familiar. Don't get me started on familiars. Though you could just sacrifice that ability for flavour.

Gametime
2010-11-08, 01:14 PM
That said, I think we can all agree that while the monk is powerful, and, when played properly, can fulfil multiple roles in the party (trapsringer, scout, combatant, healer, face, and more), he'll never be as powerful as the druid. :smallbiggrin:

I will agree that the monk is not as powerful as the druid. I will disagree that the monk is "powerful" in any meaningful way, with my standard of "power" being derived from comparison to other classes. If you mean that the monk is "powerful" in the sense of "could beat the crap out of any ordinary person," then yes, the monk is certainly powerful.

Monks generally can't fulfill more than one or two of the roles you presented, and even then they won't be great at them.

Trapspringer? Even with good saves, you're likely to roll a 1 eventually; a rogue would be better.

Scout? Yeah, the monk can do this. It'll cost all four class skill points/level, though, and they get no other benefit from Int, so I hope you're a human.

Combatant? They serve passably, but the medium BAB and lack of magical weapons without friendly buffs really hurts.

Healer? ...What? The only healing ability monks get works only on themselves, and it's a pretty small amount per day.

Face? Again, passable, but monks already need physical stats and wisdom. Adding charisma to that really puts a strain on their stat allocation. You can get by with just ranks in Diplomacy, but you won't be as good as someone who can actually afford charisma. Also, putting ranks in social skills is cutting into your severely-limited skill point pool; scouting costs 4 per level, at a minimum (Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen), negotiating costs at least 1 and probably 2 (Diplomacy, Sense Motive), and all those acrobatics you were touting earlier cost up to three more (Climb, Jump, Tumble).

That's really the downfall of the monk; anything the monk can do, the rogue can also do, and likely do better, with the solitary exception of winning in a flat footrace. The rogue can actually afford the skill investment to be sneaky, athletic, acrobatic, and diplomatic, with points left over to search for traps and disable those traps without needing to rely on making a save. The rogue also has much easier access to UMD, and gains much the same benefit as the monk from it. The rogue even makes a decent unarmed combatant; for the cost of a single feat, the rogue can now add his sneak attack damage to unarmed strikes and is just as good at the monk at assassinating people without weapons.

And for all that, the rogue isn't even a particularly great class. It's able to thoroughly outclass the monk at it's own game without being all that effective anyway.

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-08, 01:26 PM
@ true_shinken:
Favored soul has good reflexes? I must have forgotten. Still not worth playing.
And, no, I've never heard of the big five. Please enlighten me.
Also, don't get me started on wizards. The batman wizard is called that because he has to be a millionaire to afford all of those spells. I'll put up a cost breakdown later.



Healer? ...What? The only healing ability monks get works only on themselves, and it's a pretty small amount per day.



Hm. You're right, I had it confused with Lay on Hands.
Still, self-healing is nice, no? And something the rogue cannot do without a potion. And rogues roll 1s, too. And are not immune to poison at 11th level.

Psyren
2010-11-08, 01:35 PM
Unless he gets his spellbook stolen, then he's got to work only with what he's already got memorized. :smalltongue:

If you're playing with a DM that pulls crap like that, just roll Psion or Sorcerer.

Also:
Eidetic Spellcaster (Dragon 357)
Tattooed Spellbook (CArc)

Keld Denar
2010-11-08, 01:44 PM
Also, don't get me started on wizards. The batman wizard is called that because he has to be a millionaire to afford all of those spells. I'll put up a cost breakdown later.
This'll be amusing. I can put together an effective, generalized spell list together with only my 4 free spells/spell level. Free spells. You get them just for leveling up. 2 of them per level, so 4 per spell level. The trick is to get spells that are versatile enough that you can use them in multiple situations, things like Alter Self, or things that are so strong, you can monkey wrench them into nearly every situation, like Evard's Black Tentacles and Solid Fog.


And are not immune to poison at 11th level.

Everyone is immune to poison at 11th level. Its call Hero's Feast. Its a nutritious and delicious part of your adventuring morning. It also covers [Fear] effects, purges diseases, gives a bonus to hit, and lends some temp HP, which are always delicious.

Coidzor
2010-11-08, 01:57 PM
Trapspringer? Even with good saves, you're likely to roll a 1 eventually; a rogue would be better.

He doesn't need to survive springing the trap, after all. :smallbiggrin: Even a single trap foiled that could've killed someone valuable is worth the investment.

Callista
2010-11-08, 02:13 PM
You're looking at the 20th level wizard, though; real games tend to be lower level than that; plus most people aren't using the truly overpowered strategies anyway--it's like playing on god mode and that's only fun the first time. So the imbalance isn't as bad in a game as it is on paper.

The wizard is very powerful when played right, but harder to play right. A barbarian, for example, is quite easy to play, and difficult to truly mess up; hit people with large pointy objects, and when that doesn't work, rage and then hit them. Whereas with a wizard you have to know the spells (which is a lot of material) and how to use them, when to use them, what to memorize, what to craft--it's a lot more strategy.

There are a lot more possible combinations when you have a lot more options; and the more combinations, the more likely it'll be that some of those combinations will be very powerful. All of the classes that are really powerful are the ones with a lot of options; and the more books that get printed, the more options there are...

The Shadowmind
2010-11-08, 02:28 PM
Look, I like monks. There's no one better to run an obstacle course, win a marathon, or sneak into a castle and assassinate someone (while unarmed, no less, so fewer witnesses suspect you), and there's more to them than unarmed strike and flurry of blows. All good saves? No other class has that. Innate spell resistance? Evasion? Ability to walk through walls? Immunity to aging, poison, and disease? Slow fall/wall walking? Wholeness of body? Ability to communicate to any living thing, without using a spell slot? ETHEREALNESS?
Some classes have one or two of those, but all of them?

That said, I think we can all agree that while the monk is powerful, and, when played properly, can fulfil multiple roles in the party (trapsringer, scout, combatant, healer, face, and more), he'll never be as powerful as the druid. :smallbiggrin:

Lets compare the monk and the factotum.

Run an obstacle course? Factotum gets all skills as class skills, and adds int mod to Str and Dex checks, as well as 6+int skill points per level. The monk is left in the dust.
Win a marathon? Expeditious Retreat, available at level 3, by the time the monk gets the same speed bonus(level 9) the factotum could extend it for a total of 180 minutes. So maybe just maybe if the marathon is over 3 hours long then the monk could compete.
Sneak into a castle and assassinate someone? Factotum can get sneak attack die, and has a bit of spellcasting, like disguise self, or spider climb. And remember the all skills as class skills? Lucid dreaming kill them in the comfort of your home in their dreams.
Wholeness of Body? Factotum sees your wholeness of body and raises you Opportunistic Piety. Heals 2xfactotum level+int mod, compared to monk's 2xmonk level, and is usable 3+wis mod times per day compared to monk's 1/day. It also can turn undead, and heal others.
Trapsringer? The factotum has trapfinding unlike the monk, and if the trap is one of a high DC the factotum can add his factotum level to the skill check 1/day per skill.
Scout? Factotum's are likely to have ranks in spot, since unlike the monk it is a class skill.
Combatant? Factotum-Alterself into something with natural attacks, use the grab Knowledge Devotion(a feat) to gets decent bonuses to attack rolls, flank with an ally/summon an ally and sneak attack. Use extra actions paired with Cunning surge and Font of Inspiration(a feat) to turn your enemies into a pincushion. Ignore spells resistance and DR with Cunning breach.
Healer? While is already shown the the monk fails at healing, remember the Opportunistic Piety of the Factotum.
Face? While the monk does have diplomacy, the factotum has that, and intimidate, and in emergencies can add the factotum level to the skill check 1/day.

Greenish
2010-11-08, 02:35 PM
Thats why you keep a few spells tattooed on, just in case.

"I don't have a spell book but i did prepare shivering touch 16 times!"Spell Mastery.

"But Greenish, who would burn their feats for that?"

Anyone going for Uncanny Forethought (and now when I think of it, that feat allows you to cast any spell in your spellbook, even if you're not currently in possession of it).

Keld Denar
2010-11-08, 02:45 PM
Alacritous Cognition? Spontaneous Divination?

Also, if you have a spontaneous side (you are an Ultimate Magus or such), Versatile Spellcaster will let you swap slots on your spontaneous side for spells you know on your prepared side, IIRC.

Greenish
2010-11-08, 02:47 PM
Look, I like monks. There's no one better to run an obstacle course, win a marathon, or sneak into a castle and assassinate someone (while unarmed, no less, so fewer witnesses suspect you), and there's more to them than unarmed strike and flurry of blows. All good saves? No other class has that. Innate spell resistance? Evasion? Ability to walk through walls? Immunity to aging, poison, and disease? Slow fall/wall walking? Wholeness of body? Ability to communicate to any living thing, without using a spell slot? ETHEREALNESS?
Some classes have one or two of those, but all of them?Hmm, I think you can set the Incarnate up with those. Monks don't get actual wall walking, that's for psionic characters, casters or martial adepts.


That said, I think we can all agree that while the monk is powerful, and, when played properly, can fulfil multiple roles in the partyI very much doubt that we all would agree on such a premise. Monk is powerful to the same extent that an Expert is powerful.

@ true_shinken:
Favored soul has good reflexes? I must have forgotten. Still not worth playing.Still much better than a monk. They can, for example, use a wand of Divine Power without UMD.

And, no, I've never heard of the big five. Please enlighten me.Archivist, Artificer, Cleric, Druid and Wizard. The five most powerful base classes (discounting stuff like spell-to-power erudites and psionic artificers).

Eloel
2010-11-08, 02:53 PM
The batman wizard is called that because he has to be a millionaire to afford all of those spells. I'll put up a cost breakdown later.


Wall of Iron covers all costs you'll ever need.

Psyren
2010-11-08, 02:54 PM
@ true_shinken:
Favored soul has good reflexes? I must have forgotten. Still not worth playing.

You... do know they're Tier 2, right? :smallconfused:
The Cleric list is that good.
Sure they're MAD, but you don't need Wisdom; Gate has no saving throw.

Emmerask
2010-11-08, 03:01 PM
Wall of Iron covers all costs you'll ever need.

Yay lets answer a legit question with a theoretical possibility that will never be allowed by any gm?

But next time don´t forget that the wizard is also pun-pun at that level :smallwink:

Androgeus
2010-11-08, 03:03 PM
Hmm, I think you can set the Incarnate up with those. Monks don't get actual wall walking, that's for psionic characters, casters or martial adepts.
Doesn't wall walking also come in skill trick flavour?


Spell Mastery.

"But Greenish, who would burn their feats for that?"

Anyone going for Uncanny Forethought (and now when I think of it, that feat allows you to cast any spell in your spellbook, even if you're not currently in possession of it).

What about a really bad idea for VoP Shadowcrafter using Signiture Spell(Silent Image), Spell Mastery is useful then isn't it?

El Dorado
2010-11-08, 03:08 PM
So, if I wanted to tweak the PHB monk---and didn't want to go with a tashalatora monk or a swordsage---what does everyone think about the following changes?

d10 Hit Die
full BAB
skills: 6 + Int mod
replace flurry of blows with ToB's Snap Kick feat (ignoring the level prerequisite)

Not enough? Too much? Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

Boci
2010-11-08, 03:11 PM
Yay lets answer a legit question with a theoretical possibility that will never be allowed by any gm?

But next time don´t forget that the wizard is also pun-pun at that level :smallwink:

So you're equating the logical use of a core spell to a theoretical build? Yes, most DMs won't allow iron wall for infinate wealth, but its a good way to demonstrate the power of spells: permenantly creating something for nothing.

Callista
2010-11-08, 03:17 PM
Iron wall wouldn't create infinite wealth. Eventually, there would be too much of a surplus of iron for it to be worth selling anymore; and even before that, there would be the cost of paying people to sell it for you and paying people to transport it. Your actual profit would be a good living--probably a very good living--but it wouldn't last forever.

Boci
2010-11-08, 03:21 PM
Iron wall wouldn't create infinite wealth. Eventually, there would be too much of a surplus of iron for it to be worth selling anymore; and even before that, there would be the cost of paying people to sell it for you and paying people to transport it. Your actual profit would be a good living--probably a very good living--but it wouldn't last forever.

I know it wouldn't create wealth, but iron wall + summon monster to carry it is a good way to use spell slots during down time. Of course if such a tactics were allowed all wizards would be doing it and thus iron would probably cost as much as dirt in any setting with medium or greater magic.

Emmerask
2010-11-08, 03:22 PM
So you're equating the logical use of a core spell to a theoretical build? Yes, most DMs won't allow iron wall for infinate wealth, but its a good way to demonstrate the power of spells: permenantly creating something for nothing.

Mainly I question the relevance for this thread :smallwink:

Yes, you can answer every single d&d question with "become pun-pun", has this any baring on actual gameplay or how difficult or powerful something is?
Nope none at all.

But it gets old pretty fast hearing such """answers""" to problems :smallwink:

Boci
2010-11-08, 03:25 PM
Mainly I question the relevance for this thread :smallwink:

Yes, you can answer every single d&d question with "become pun-pun", has this any baring on actual gameplay or how difficult or powerful something is?
Nope none at all.

But it gets old pretty fast hearing such """answers""" to problems :smallwink:

You were the one to mention pun-pun, whoch as you pointed out never sees the light of day in gameplay. But the iron wall actually demonstrates a point relevant to games: even in core, magic has ways to permenantly creating something for nothing.

Emmerask
2010-11-08, 03:28 PM
You were the one to mention pun-pun, whoch as you pointed out never sees the light of day in gameplay. But the iron wall actually demonstrates a point relevant to games: even in core, magic has ways to permenantly creating something for nothing.

which also never sees the light of day with any sane dm
the sell part that is for infinite money

Which I tried to emphasize with the obvious exaggeration...

/edit

so the comment becomes as helpful as mentioning become pun-pun :smallwink:

Boci
2010-11-08, 03:39 PM
which also never sees the light of day with any sane dm
the sell part that is for infinite money

Which I tried to emphasize with the obvious exaggeration...

/edit

so the comment becomes as helpful as mentioning become pun-pun :smallwink:

When did I say anything about selling it for infinite money? Thats not the only way in which this is problematic.

JaronK
2010-11-08, 03:50 PM
At the heart of our differences probably is

- I see it as no weakness for a non-caster to buy stuff that creates synergy with its class abilities and get buffs, all of which can be destroyed and dispelled. Much like what happens to what the wizard buys and buffs.

We've seen your builds. You often spend huge amounts on consumables, which means in a real game your WBL would go down the toilet. Remember, you're expected to spend only about 10% on consumables. Go over that, and you're hurting. Meanwhile, a Wizard doesn't have to rely on a multi round buff sequence before each fight... he can just scribe a few scrolls of spells he doesn't want to memorize but thinks might come up some day, like Knock. That's cheap as heck.

Plus, heavy reliance on consumables that you can't make yourself means you're relying on those items being available for sale. In games where the pressure is on and you're not near civilization (the evil demon lord in the abyss has a plan to destroy the material plane... you've got a week to get to his fortress and destroy him!) you can't just hit the magic mart every few fights.

Basically, your character is relying on stuff that they likely wouldn't have access to in a real game. Plus, non class UMD isn't demonstrating anything about the Monk class, so it's just a Class X Fallacy. And you're basically relying on the DM to hand you the perfect custom gear you wanted... in other words "if the DM makes me powerful, I'll be powerful." That's true for everyone, not just Monks. You've said nothing about the Monk class.


- I see core as way more balanced than non-core. Sure non-casters get more options and thus get more powerful. But casters get the game-breaking swift and immediate actions, celerity, ultra-powerful prestige classes etc. Have a look at the typical recommendations of spells and spell combos for, say, wizards: the vast majority is non-core.

Actually, the big spells are usually Glitterdust, Alter Self, Polymorph, Shapechange, Gate, Planar Binding, Magic Circle, Dimensional Anchor... notice anything about that list? Casters get more options, but the most powerful stuff (except perhaps Genesis and Celerity) is in core. Sure, outside of core Sorcerers get an actually good blast spell (Wings of Flurry) but inside of core they could have been casting Polymorph and such already, so what they gained was variety. And the PrCs usually only let you do stuff you already could do easier. Sure, Shadowcraft Mage lets you just default to spells you wanted, but you could cast them all already.

Meanwhile, suddenly you've got the unarmed Swordsage, which is actually a decent Monk (unlike the real Monk), and also a solid Ninja. You've got the Warblade, which is actually a decent Fighter and Barbarian. The Crusader is a decent Knight or Paladin, and also a balanced Cleric. None of these are NEARLY as strong as Wizards or Druids, but they're strong in their own right and flexible and fun.

JaronK

Coidzor
2010-11-08, 04:29 PM
When did I say anything about selling it for infinite money? Thats not the only way in which this is problematic.

I dunno, having free castle walls never struck me as problematic but rather thematic.


Iron wall wouldn't create infinite wealth. Eventually, there would be too much of a surplus of iron for it to be worth selling anymore; and even before that, there would be the cost of paying people to sell it for you and paying people to transport it. Your actual profit would be a good living--probably a very good living--but it wouldn't last forever.

That depends on a lot of factors, really. And should hinge more upon good DMing preventing the wizard from spending a year producing 1.467%* of the modern world's annual iron production on a planet larger than that of the planet earth that is itself embedded in a system of infinite planes that have infinite war-time demand for material somewhere.

Certainly, I would say the idea of professionally getting into the interplanar ironmongering business would attract some NPCs a la the traveling shoppes from Discworld.

Hmm, I think I have a new idea for a pair of NPCs now, thanks! :smallbiggrin:

*I fudged the numbers so they depend on an estimate of 472 pounds of iron per cubic foot of the substance from the wall of iron spell as opposed to 450 for cast iron and 486 for wrought iron. And is based on wikipedia's 2009 estimates of worldwide iron production at 2,300,000 tonnes.

JaronK
2010-11-08, 04:38 PM
If you were doing infinite wealth with iron, you wouldn't just sell the iron. It costs gold to make anyway (50gp IIRC) and you could depress the iron markets without much profit. Far better to cast Fabricate after making the iron, turning it into powerful armor (Suslean Chainweave Mechanicus Gear, anyone?). You could get many suits of armor out of each wall, and each one is worth 30kgp+. That's much better, even selling at half market value. If the market ever gets depressed for that, just Fabricate something else. With Magecraft, you always have the skill to do it.

JaronK

Gametime
2010-11-08, 05:14 PM
@ true_shinken:
Favored soul has good reflexes? I must have forgotten. Still not worth playing.
And, no, I've never heard of the big five. Please enlighten me.
Also, don't get me started on wizards. The batman wizard is called that because he has to be a millionaire to afford all of those spells. I'll put up a cost breakdown later.

The Favored Soul is well worth playing. Even assuming that casters and noncasters are balanced, the Favored Soul is basically the Cleric's answer to Sorcerers. Unless you think either Clerics or Sorcerers are not worth playing either - and they both are - there's no reason to shoot down the Favored Soul.




Hm. You're right, I had it confused with Lay on Hands.
Still, self-healing is nice, no? And something the rogue cannot do without a potion. And rogues roll 1s, too. And are not immune to poison at 11th level.

It's nice, but it's too small an amount to be of much help. It'll only rarely mean the difference between life and death; more often, you saved the cleric a low level spell slot or a few charges from a wand. Forgettable.

Rogues also roll 1's, but thanks to being able to actually disarm traps they don't have to worry about those 1's being saving throws. It's much easier to boost skill checks than saves, and skill checks don't autofail. It's true that they don't get free immunity to poison, but by 11th level it's not a hard immunity to come by, and poisons are usually pretty easy to heal. Moreover, the most dangerous traps aren't the poisonous kind; they're the ones that collapse an entire room, or throw you into a lava pit, or just disintegrate you. Some of those traps are ones that could affect the whole party, not just the person who triggered it, so having no ability to disarm the trap safely is a gamble. (And if you're going that route, better to use summoned monkeys anyway.)

But you didn't address what I see as the real weakness of the monk class, as I pointed out: weak abilities combined with far too few skill points. This is a larger problem than the monk class alone, but for a class supposed to represent the fantasy martial artist, monks are shockingly bad at the acrobatic feats we'd expect of them. Climbing, Jumping, Balancing, and Tumbling should be something every monk is good at, rather than something you have to invest in at the expense of every other skill. I hope your monk wasn't planning on being a wise philosopher, or a stealthy stalker, or a persuasive orator, because he's all out of skill points just covering the basics of what his role should entail.


So, if I wanted to tweak the PHB monk---and didn't want to go with a tashalatora monk or a swordsage---what does everyone think about the following changes?

d10 Hit Die
full BAB
skills: 6 + Int mod
replace flurry of blows with ToB's Snap Kick feat (ignoring the level prerequisite)

Not enough? Too much? Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

Probably not enough to make the class really competitive, but it would be entirely playable. Still too few skills points, though, unless you're using a consolidated skill system like Pathfinder's. Using the basic 3.5 skill list, anything less than 8+int points per level for the monk is just too restrictive, and even that's lower than I'd like.

Esser-Z
2010-11-08, 05:27 PM
Too few skill points are, really, a problem Monk gets to share with a ton of classes.

Goudaa
2010-11-08, 05:33 PM
Let's just be real here guys. In core, everything sucks compared to wizards and cleric.

Munchkin class dippers ruin group balance for any pure class =)

Play what you enjoy and try to RP has always been my motto.

JaronK
2010-11-08, 05:40 PM
Let's just be real here guys. In core, everything sucks compared to wizards and cleric.

*cough* Druid *cough*

And actually Sorcerers are decent too. Not as good as a Wizard, surely. But still darn good.


Munchkin class dippers ruin group balance for any pure class =)

No they don't. They actually help with Monks (Monk 6/Shou Disciple 5 isn't nearly as bad, and Monk 2/Other good stuff 18 is quite nice). Class dipping just means you know the rules well enough to make your character mechanically mesh better with your RP and your character goals.

JaronK

Eloel
2010-11-08, 05:42 PM
Munchkin class dippers ruin group balance for any pure class =)

My detectors are rusty, so if that is sarcasm, you'll have to pardon me.
Class dipping helps non-casters, you don't want to be losing CL with a caster, while the melee guys can get their BAB one way or another. And ToB is actually dip-friendly.

Psyren
2010-11-08, 05:42 PM
Munchkin class dippers ruin group balance for any pure class =)

Munchkin anything ruins balance. You can be a pure class munchkin too.

Eloel
2010-11-08, 05:43 PM
Munchkin anything ruins balance. You can be a pure class munchkin too.

Meh, while I never played it, Munchkin sounds like a fun game :smallbiggrin:

Otodetu
2010-11-08, 05:46 PM
2 well played spell-casters at level 7 and a cleric 8 from core-only can defeat a level 7 sword-sage, a level 8 crusader, and a 7 sword-sage\rough backed up by a friendly behir, troll, and wyvern. (don't ask)
All players had experience with the system using any source and good builds able to dish out over 50 damage with a standard attack if given the chance.

It was fear effects involved with resilient spheres in choke points breaking up and breaking down the party, none where really surprised, casters in a open doorway underground 40-50 feet away rolling init vs the party that had been noisy breaking down a door or some cr 5 skeletons if I remember right. (Casters where not setup to handle the party, but had generic spell-lists for unexpected situations.)

It shows that spell-casters can inhibit you from getting your plans into action, break up formations and gish it out with the broken remains of the enemy force. All the monsters and the swordsage failed the save vs fear, and the spiked chain cleric wiped the floor with the rest, scaring them (rl) into a hasty retreat, the npc's did not desire to pursue, and followed up their plan, succeeding as the players where to intimidated to intimidate until many days later.


Martial encounters many cr's above the same party have been SLAUGHTERED and laughed at. (okay, challenging, but no casualties, and less allies.)

When faced with an obstacle a spell-caster will most likely have a solution that will aid himself and his party, a monk will not, not even a blinged out one.

Edit: (why do I even bother keeping this thread alive?)

Coidzor
2010-11-08, 05:49 PM
So a tier 1 and 2 tier 1-2s can take out 3 tier 3 melee guys backed up by a melee brute, a flying melee brute, and a huge melee brute.

Sounds right.

Ah. Yes, the spellcaster does bring more to the table.

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-08, 05:52 PM
You... do know they're Tier 2, right? :smallconfused:
The Cleric list is that good.
Sure they're MAD, but you don't need Wisdom; Gate has no saving throw.

I don't believe in the tiers representing power. But that's a rant for another thread.

@Gametime: No, I dont think sorcs are all that great, and the MAD for spellcasting bothers me. Monks' MAD is not so strong, you just need above-average scores in Dex and Wis, maybe Str.

@Greenish: I haven't read up on incarnates.
Also, read the Class Construction Engine. Based on class features, they are quite powerful. And they should never have to resort to umd.

One of the biggest advantage monks have is maneuverability on the battlefield, the utility of which is often underestimated. By the time you react to them, they've already tripped or disarmed you, and are out of reach.

No, they aren't fantastic on their own, I'll grant you, but as part of a team they can do wonders. Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue. They are the laser guidance for their teammate's rockets.
I repeat: on their own, I concede that they are not optimal. As part of a team? Amazing. And this is supposed to be a cooperative game, is it not?

Enough. We are getting nowhere, as we always have when debating the utility of this class in suboptimal situations. Let the anger end, and let us all agree that the druid is the best.:smalltongue:

Psyren
2010-11-08, 05:55 PM
I don't believe in the tiers representing power. But that's a rant for another thread.

They don't - they represent versatility. However, what you are capable of is strongly related to the power available to you.

For example, both a Wizard and a Monk are capable of a challenge like "win a footrace." But the Wizard is much better equipped for "win a war." That's the kind of thing a T1-2 can do.

Eloel
2010-11-08, 05:58 PM
@Gametime: No, I dont think sorcs are all that great, and the MAD for spellcasting bothers me. Monks' MAD is not so strong, you just need above-average scores in Dex and Wis, maybe Str.

Monks need above average Str, Dex, Con and Wis.
Favored Soul needs above average Cha, and a passing Wis if he feels like it.

Coidzor
2010-11-08, 06:06 PM
No, they aren't fantastic on their own, I'll grant you, but as part of a team they can do wonders. Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue. They are the laser guidance for their teammate's rockets.
I repeat: on their own, I concede that they are not optimal. As part of a team? Amazing. And this is supposed to be a cooperative game, is it not?

A team is only as strong as its weakest link, thus examination of the individual classes is a valid exercise. The monk falls short in the eyes of many who've looked at the mechanics of the matter such that the consensus is that they're a weak class.

Gametime
2010-11-08, 06:07 PM
@Gametime: No, I dont think sorcs are all that great, and the MAD for spellcasting bothers me. Monks' MAD is not so strong, you just need above-average scores in Dex and Wis, maybe Str.

That's an interesting position. There's no real way to counter it, except by saying that I firmly believe you to be in error about the capabilities of a sorcerer with well-chosen spells.

All a Favored Soul "needs" is 19 in stat, to cast 9th level spells, by level 17. Higher scores would be much better, but hardly necessary. In contrast, a monk doesn't "need" a wisdom of above 10, but with few other ways to boost AC he's going to want either a dexterity or wisdom score significantly higher than 19 so he can actually avoid getting hit all the time. Further, while Favored Souls pretty clearly lean towards melee, there are enough blasty and controlly cleric spells that the FS can dump physical stats if he really wants to. The monk can't. His MAD will almost always be worse, even if the FS goes melee too, because the FS doesn't need dexterity and probably isn't desperate for skill points.


No, they aren't fantastic on their own, I'll grant you, but as part of a team they can do wonders. Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue. They are the laser guidance for their teammate's rockets.
I repeat: on their own, I concede that they are not optimal. As part of a team? Amazing. And this is supposed to be a cooperative game, is it not?

I'm not sure why you think they're better in melee than bards (who can actually use decent weapons and have the same attack bonus, as well as several buffs from music and spells) or more durable than rogues (who, despite the smaller hit die, can actually wear armor and will likely have a comparable or higher AC at low to mid levels).


Enough. We are getting nowhere, as we always have when debating the utility of this class in suboptimal situations. Let the anger end, and let us all agree that the druid is the best.:smalltongue:

It's your prerogative to stop debating the issue whenever you want. It's a bit odd to put forward such a request immediately following a response to several people, however.

EDIT: Does this mean we aren't going to see the cost breakdown for wizard spells? Because I was actually curious about that.

Keld Denar
2010-11-08, 06:08 PM
No, they aren't fantastic on their own, I'll grant you, but as part of a team they can do wonders. Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue. They are the laser guidance for their teammate's rockets.
I repeat: on their own, I concede that they are not optimal. As part of a team? Amazing. And this is supposed to be a cooperative game, is it not?

Except as has been proven, they aren't even good in a team. I'd rather have a bard as a 5th man than a monk. Core monks are good for one thing...running away. Outside of core, monks get a lot of options for self-buffing and filling their role as martial controllers. Core only monks can easily be replaced by ANY other class and not be missed.

I agree, RP what you want, but at least have the resources available to be semi-competant at what you want to do. Your best option for playing a monk in a core-only environment is to not.

Kallisti
2010-11-08, 06:34 PM
Except as has been proven, they aren't even good in a team. I'd rather have a bard as a 5th man than a monk. Core monks are good for one thing...running away. Outside of core, monks get a lot of options for self-buffing and filling their role as martial controllers. Core only monks can easily be replaced by ANY other class and not be missed.

Earlier joking aside, I'm actually curious to see this. Two core-only games, with the same DM running the same party through the same dungeons. The only difference in players/DM is that group has, say, a Bard or Sorcerer, and the other has Giacomo playing his core monk build.

The games are run simultaneously, and the players agree not to metagame, since they're curious, too, or they wouldn't have agreed to play.

DM could run them through a couple of adventures--a dungeon crawl to begin with, and then some more unusual situations.

Keld Denar
2010-11-08, 06:36 PM
Do a site search (or a site:giantitp.com google search) for the Monkening. Its already been done. Saph, Giacomo, Pharoah's Fist, and Eldariel IIRC all took part in.

Gametime
2010-11-08, 06:41 PM
If I recall correctly, the Monkening never finished and the results of each encounter were vigorously contested. It was an interesting experiment, but ultimately everyone saw what they wanted to see in it.

AslanCross
2010-11-08, 06:46 PM
So, if I wanted to tweak the PHB monk---and didn't want to go with a tashalatora monk or a swordsage---what does everyone think about the following changes?

d10 Hit Die
full BAB
skills: 6 + Int mod
replace flurry of blows with ToB's Snap Kick feat (ignoring the level prerequisite)

Not enough? Too much? Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

That's okay for a low-OP campaign and will probably work well alongside a sword-and-board fighter, healbot cleric, and a blaster wizard. You still have the major problem of being MAD.

Skjaldbakka
2010-11-08, 06:54 PM
Monks are broken, in the sense that they don't work as advertised.

Workaround:
Play a rogue with IUS and take monk feats.

Patch:
Full BAB
Ki Pool = Monk Level
1/day abilities such as abundant step, wholeness of body, stunning fist, etc instead use 1 pt from Ki Pool
Flurry of Blows is usable as a standard action
Air Walk as per cleric Travel Doman ability, except with the Air Walk spell, starting at level one.
6+int skill points

Fix:
Tome of Battle.

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-08, 06:55 PM
The batman wizard is called that because he has to be a millionaire to afford all of those spells. I'll put up a cost breakdown later.

I guess you've never borrowed/rented a spellbook or bought/crafted a Boccob's Blessed Book? Learning spells isn't as expensive as you make it out to be.

Myth
2010-11-08, 06:59 PM
Aye it just takes days upon days.

Kallisti
2010-11-08, 08:32 PM
If I recall correctly, the Monkening never finished and the results of each encounter were vigorously contested. It was an interesting experiment, but ultimately everyone saw what they wanted to see in it.

Which is why I'm still curious, and would structure my test with the characters being compared--the Bard/Sorcerer/Other core 5th man and the monk--in separate but otherwise theoretically identical campaigns.

That way we have a relatively quantifiable measure for which character is contributing more--which party is doing better?

Of course, you'd want some way to minimize the impact of luck. Perhaps pre-rolling?

Lans
2010-11-08, 08:46 PM
They don't - they represent versatility. However, what you are capable of is strongly related to the power available to you.

For example, both a Wizard and a Monk are capable of a challenge like "win a footrace." But the Wizard is much better equipped for "win a war." That's the kind of thing a T1-2 can do.
Power as a consideration, Just on the Warrior<Fighter<ACF Fighter front. Its just not the only factor, which is why Adepts are on the same tier as infinidamage chargebarians.

Aquillion
2010-11-08, 09:03 PM
One of the biggest advantage monks have is maneuverability on the battlefield, the utility of which is often underestimated. By the time you react to them, they've already tripped or disarmed you, and are out of reach.Monks don't really have mobility, is the think. What mobility really requires is the ability to move and attack effectively with the same action. Psychic Warriors, say, have great mobility, because they can use things like Hustle and Psychic Lion's Charge to move and attack at the same time -- combine Hustle with personal dimension door (which they can buff to move-action), and in an emergency a Psychic Warrior can instantly warp over to an enemy caster and unload a full attack in their face.

The Monk can run over to them and... make one attack. Not as useful.


No, they aren't fantastic on their own, I'll grant you, but as part of a team they can do wonders. Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue. They are the laser guidance for their teammate's rockets.
I repeat: on their own, I concede that they are not optimal. As part of a team? Amazing. And this is supposed to be a cooperative game, is it not?That's exactly wrong. Monks are actually much more useful on their own, because defense is more valuable when you're the only person to attack. Mobility-without-mobile-attacks is also more useful on your own, because you can just run away if you get in trouble (whereas if you do that in a group, monsters will just kill everyone else and you'll be kinda screwed.)

Monks don't really have anything good for granting combat bonuses. If you want that, use a caster and throw around buffs. Or, well, a bard.

The rogue does actual damage much much better than the monk, too -- sneak attack is effective both with single attacks and flurries. (And the cleric vastly outdoes both when they get their buffs up, for what that's worth.) The rogue's extra damage is worth a lot more than the monk's extra defenses, because chances are the rogue is still not the weakest member of the party, and it is the weakest member of the party, not the strongest, that determines how effective your overall defenses are.

Monsters won't be going after the monk, the rogue, or the bard, they'll be going after the wizard. What matters is how good you are at keeping your squishiest member alive. Rogues are great at that, because if the monster tries to focus on the wizard, the rogue flanks and sneak attacks for massive damage. Sneak attack also works better with stuff that grants extra attacks, like Haste, or with various spells that help it apply, like Invisibility or the spells that let you use it against automatons / undead.

The Rogue is actually a much better team player than the Monk, basically -- their abilities have good synergy for the typical situations you're actually likely to encounter. Rogues are (comparatively) monofocused on one thing, with the assumption that the rest of the team will cover other things. Bards are jacks of all trades, but they're jacks of all the trades that help others -- experts at filling gaps as needed -- so they're good in a party, too.

Monks have a lot of unrelated powers that are redundant with the rest of the team and don't synergize with them well. They're tough but less tough than the fighter, and not tough enough to stand directly in front of a monster and flurry repeatedly... which makes their flurry of blows pointless. They have a smattering of other things, but it's all stuff other people does better, and unlike the Bard (who leaps right into the gaps that are likely to need to be filled in an emergency with stuff like healing, counterspells, bonuses to wide varieties of dice rolls, etc) it's not stuff that really helps your team.

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-08, 10:21 PM
Monks don't really have mobility, is the think. What mobility really requires is the ability to move and attack effectively with the same action....

The Monk can run over to them and... make one attack. Not as useful.



Spring attack. Can be used to disarm or trip, if you want. Or deliver contact poison, if that's your thing.

Alternatively, charge+grapple. I've seen it work just fine, with the monk holding the girallon still while the warlock and fighter did the real damage. Worked on the dragon, too. Worked on everything. And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table.
I guess it's not about the class, but the player.

Bards get armor and can use a longsword (inferior to higher-end unarmed strikes), but provide less to attack rolls than a prone or grappled opponent. Rogues do damage, but cannot take as much damage, and require conditions for their signature combat ability. They are more useful during the surprise round and outside of combat than three rounds into melee. And yeah, smart monsters will go for the wizard. That's what the fighter and barbarian are for; to keep the monster at bay.

I'm not saying the monk can replace anybody. I'm just saying the monk can be more useful than a lot of us give it credit for. In a four-member party, give me a healer/tank/skillmonkey/magey combo any day. But 5 members? Monk makes everyone better, IME. Your table may vary.

Hey, I've been quoted more on this thread, just for sticking up for a core class, than in all of the other threads I've been quoted in combined! Maybe I should play devil's advocate more often....

Boci
2010-11-08, 10:28 PM
Spring attack. Can be used to disarm or trip, if you want.

And not use FoB or full attack. Doesn't really cut it at higher levels.


Or deliver contact poison, if that's your thing.

Static fort save, very expensive if you want it to have a decent chance of producing any affect, and increasingly common immunity as the game progresses.


Alternatively, charge+grapple. I've seen it work just fine, with the monk holding the girallon still while the warlock and fighter did the real damage. Worked on the dragon, too. Worked on everything. And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table.
I guess it's not about the class, but the player.

Medium BAB versus monsters which higher HD and strength than you.


Hey, I've been quoted more on this thread, just for sticking up for a core class, than in all of the other threads I've been quoted in combined! Maybe I should play devil's advocate more often....

Yes people tend to pay more attention to you if you disagree than if you agree with them.

olentu
2010-11-08, 10:49 PM
Spring attack. Can be used to disarm or trip, if you want. Or deliver contact poison, if that's your thing.

Alternatively, charge+grapple. I've seen it work just fine, with the monk holding the girallon still while the warlock and fighter did the real damage. Worked on the dragon, too. Worked on everything. And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table.
I guess it's not about the class, but the player.

Bards get armor and can use a longsword (inferior to higher-end unarmed strikes), but provide less to attack rolls than a prone or grappled opponent. Rogues do damage, but cannot take as much damage, and require conditions for their signature combat ability. They are more useful during the surprise round and outside of combat than three rounds into melee. And yeah, smart monsters will go for the wizard. That's what the fighter and barbarian are for; to keep the monster at bay.

I'm not saying the monk can replace anybody. I'm just saying the monk can be more useful than a lot of us give it credit for. In a four-member party, give me a healer/tank/skillmonkey/magey combo any day. But 5 members? Monk makes everyone better, IME. Your table may vary.

Hey, I've been quoted more on this thread, just for sticking up for a core class, than in all of the other threads I've been quoted in combined! Maybe I should play devil's advocate more often....

Well perhaps injury poison since poison immunity if not impermeable poison barrier. Er is suppose you could be tossing a vial of the contact stuff at them but that is the sort of thing anyone could do.

Coidzor
2010-11-08, 10:54 PM
^: Poison, nice at low levels for everyone.
Hey, I've been quoted more on this thread, just for sticking up for a core class, than in all of the other threads I've been quoted in combined! Maybe I should play devil's advocate more often....

What's supposed to be so special about something just because it's core though?

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-08, 11:49 PM
I'm not doing it for the attention (though it is nice to know my opinion provokes responses). I have a soft spot for core stuff, I guess.

Really, though, I'm just trying to help the rest of you see a different point of view. You say monks are all weak, unless they use UMD or something, and I want to defend what I have seen perform well, under the right circumstances.

I've also played an unarmed half-orc fighter (good grappler), and an unarmed ogre fighter (great grappler). If it was all about wrestling, I'd play one of those. But monks are good for tactical advantages. That's what I've seen, at any rate. Maybe if I saw an unarmed swordsage do the same things, I'd agree with a few more of you, but I haven't.

Poisons stay good at higher levels, they just get more expensive. And sure, there are lots of creatures with immunity. There are also many creatures with spell resistance, energy resistance, crit immunity, spell immunity, and so on. That's just part of the game. I'm not saying poison "fixes" the monk, just that it's something you might find fun that you can do once you're immune.

Honestly, I prefer to play fighters. But in the hands of the right player, I have seen monks make the difference between winning an encounter and losing. I have seen this from both sides of the DM screen. And it bugs me a little when I see people who haven't seen this diss the monk. Or the fighter. Or anything that isn't the wizard (who relies on WBL as much as anybody else, as I'll write up in an upcoming thread, once I have my homework done).

I don't want you guys to feel like I'm threatening your opinion or that I don't think it's valid. As I said earlier, performance at your table may vary.

Keld Denar
2010-11-09, 12:04 AM
But 5 members? Monk makes everyone better, IME. Your table may vary.

No...Bards make everyone better. Its in the job description.

EDIT: In fact, a well made Bard can make even a Monk good. Flurry of Blows + TWF + Dragonfire Inspiration is a great combo. You just have to rely on someone else to be effective, which is pretty much par for the course for a straight class Monk.

Kallisti
2010-11-09, 12:11 AM
Not everyone is saying Monks can't perform well, though--they're saying they can't perform as well as other classes, even within their niche.

Take the Monks-as-grapplers example. Yes, Monks can grapple. You'll get reducing returns on that investment as the party gains levels--your BaB and Strength just won't keep up consistently with the monsters' Strength, HD, and size, not to mention Freedom of Movement.

A Barbarian grappling build will face the exact same problems.

The theory is that the Barbarian grappler will remain consistently useful longer, and be more capable of contributing in fights where grappling isn't feasible. Barbarians get higher BaB, probably have higher Strength, being less MAD, and get Rage. A Monk gets his bonus feats, which do help, but in Core there aren't enough good feat choices for that to make a huge difference. The Monk has no armor--meaning no armor spikes, and thus in Core no damage contribution at all while grappling IIRC--and is more reliant on ability scores for AC, and has a smaller HD, and thus needs a higher Con to have the same staying power. Plus once grappling goes out of style, the Barbarian will be more able to contribute as a frontliner. Monks do get some neat new toys at mid-to-high level--most of them aren't a lot of help grappling, though, which is the example I'm addressing now--and the Monk's fast movement is actually useful for getting up to targets to use a combat maneuver. The Barbarian gets Fast Movement, though--40 ft. per round is usually pretty sufficient.

awa
2010-11-09, 12:33 AM
monks do better in low op games then they do in high opp. also dm play style can come into play a huge deal by which i mean in many games ive played monster tend to charge the closest enemy and and attack it repeatedly at least in the first rounds of combat. in other games every thing with an int of4+ goes straight for the wizard. therefore the monks good defense (by wich i am including their saves) is useful.

also bard might not be great but there not that bad power wise they do still get spells

Optimator
2010-11-09, 01:35 AM
So, if I wanted to tweak the PHB monk---and didn't want to go with a tashalatora monk or a swordsage---what does everyone think about the following changes?

d10 Hit Die
full BAB
skills: 6 + Int mod
replace flurry of blows with ToB's Snap Kick feat (ignoring the level prerequisite)

Not enough? Too much? Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

Hell, give 'em 8 skill points. I would totally be okay with those changes were I DMing. It's not overpowered IMO. Doesn't address all monk flaws, but it certainly helps. And really, what quick change could though?

turkishproverb
2010-11-09, 01:56 AM
Ah, rebuilding the monk, an underrated class to begin with. Good times.



So, if I wanted to tweak the PHB monk---and didn't want to go with a tashalatora monk or a swordsage---what does everyone think about the following changes?

d10 Hit Die
full BAB
skills: 6 + Int mod
replace flurry of blows with ToB's Snap Kick feat (ignoring the level prerequisite)

Not enough? Too much? Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

FoB is a good ability. Just give them a Pounce with it, instead of having to stand still.

Nyarai
2010-11-09, 02:23 AM
Alternatively, charge+grapple. I've seen it work just fine, with the monk holding the girallon still while the warlock and fighter did the real damage. Worked on the dragon, too. Worked on everything. And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table.

I guess it's not about the class, but the player.


Or yanno, luck. The lone druid (who was an on-level encounter for our party) died because the half-dragon's breath weapon shunted him out of his Meld into Stone (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/meldintostone.htm). He needed anything but a 1 to live.

Granted, I've seen a monk do some pretty cool things. She got to pounce on a dragon from a tree and pull a half-spider chick off a wall. That was over an entire campaign though and while the character never got turned to monkpaste, her effectiveness came in spurts for the most part.


Bards get armor and can use a longsword (inferior to higher-end unarmed strikes), but provide less to attack rolls than a prone or grappled opponent.

I beg your pardon? Ignoring damage dice (irrelevant at high end), the bard has a wide array of SPELLS to bring to the table that provide more to attack rolls. Even just singing provides a bonus to attacks *and* damage. However, the bard also has Grease (makes enemies prone or flat-footed for the rogue), Tasha's Hideous Laughter (this took out more BEG's than the aforementioned monk), Hold Person (free CDG? yes please), Charm Monster (a well-worded statement and your new pal will either harry or straight-up butcher his former allies). Oh and Haste. I don't think a +4 to melee attacks can top that.

Also, remember the ranged. While the barbarian will hack merrily at the foe you tripped, your archery specced ranger will be at a -4. Or - if you initiate a grapple - have a 50% chance of shooting you in the ass. After the player metagamed his way to the action, the monk (modern campaign) pulled in the lone enemy for a long and sweaty man-hug. The enemy who I was shooting in the face with a gun for more attacks and damage. Trying to be friendly, I shouldered my rifle. He told my character to learn to shoot.

:furious:

Greenish
2010-11-09, 07:24 AM
I don't believe in the tiers representing power. But that's a rant for another thread.They represent the probability of having a mechanical ability that can solve a given problem, to be technical.

@Greenish: I haven't read up on incarnates.MoI is brilliant. Give it a go if you can! :smallcool:


Also, read the Class Construction Engine. Based on class features, they are quite powerful.The what?

Most of what they do revolves around staying alive long enough to grant everyone else combat bonuses, and unlike the bard, they can hold their own in melee as well as a cleric, and better than the squishy rogue.Bards can hold their own in melee (easily better than monks), if they wish. Neither comes even close to cleric though.


Really, though, I'm just trying to help the rest of you see a different point of view. You say monks are all weak, unless they use UMD or something, and I want to defend what I have seen perform well, under the right circumstances."Right circumstances" seems to translate to "low-optimization game".

Poisons stay good at higher levels, they just get more expensive.You keep using "good" in the different sense than many others. If something is "good", it should compare favourably to other options available.

Hell, give 'em 8 skill points. I would totally be okay with those changes were I DMing. It's not overpowered IMO.Most all classes could use more skillpoints.

And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table.
I guess it's not about the class, but the player.Or maybe it's about the table? (This is where you insinuate that we don't actually know what we're talking about and haven't seen monk in action, and I insinuate that you play with scrubs. :smallwink:) Just kidding, of course.

Bards get armor and can use a longsword (inferior to higher-end unarmed strikes)Two-handing a longsword with PA and, say, a bard's self buffs is quite a bit superior to monk's higher base damage.

but provide less to attack rolls than a prone or grappled opponent.If we have an overtly negative image of the monk, you have one of the bard. +4 to attack and 4d6+4 to damage is doable from level 3, just from music, and bard actually has spellcasting of her own and UMD as a class skill.

Really, I'm shocked and appalled on how you keep heaping abuse on the most awesome core class to make monks look better! :smallwink:

Eloel
2010-11-09, 07:31 AM
Really, I'm shocked and appalled on how you keep heaping abuse on the most awesome core class to make monks look better! :smallwink:

Awesome, as in well-made. Bard, imo, is the most balanced (I call T3 the "midpoint") and most well-made in all D&D 3.5
It has combat utility, social utility, out-of-combat encounter utility, and generally a bunch of things to do, without any option being clearly superior way of doing it.
I think that comes with Jack-of-all-trades though.
(For #2 "best" class on my list, see Factotum)

Notreallyhere77
2010-11-09, 11:30 AM
You win, Greenish. It's true, looking back, I've never seen a monk in a high-optimization game, and that probably accounts for a great deal.

I may or may not put up a link to the Class Construction Engine, but sisnce I got it from a friend, I don't know if I can do so under copyright.

It's actually pretty neat for keeping homebrew stuff balanced.

Greenish
2010-11-09, 12:32 PM
You win, Greenish.YES!!1!1! My mum will be so proud. She always told me I'm special.


So, can you even give us a skinny on what the CCE does?

true_shinken
2010-11-09, 12:45 PM
YES!!1!1! My mum will be so proud. She always told me I'm special.


So, can you even give us a skinny on what the CCE does?

As any seasoned 3.0 veteran knows, the CCE is a list of 'points' each class feature takes for balancing them.
The Monk had the highest score, so no one actually takes it seriously. IIRC, it's not even from WotC anyway.

Greenish
2010-11-09, 12:48 PM
As any seasoned 3.0 veteran knows…Which is why I had to ask. :smalltongue:

Break
2010-11-09, 01:21 PM
I may or may not put up a link to the Class Construction Engine, but sisnce I got it from a friend, I don't know if I can do so under copyright.

It's actually pretty neat for keeping homebrew stuff balanced.


So, can you even give us a skinny on what the CCE does?

You mean this one? (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:NlFA3-extYYJ:rumkin.com/reference/dnd/media/classconstruction.pdf+%22class+construction+engine %22&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjvWQL0g4CNiNCuaVKgEQO6YR6cyafYhup9Qmm-zDJsv2bT6q2Wz8znfLTze4-NbhF53CWSiLwbJAm2cyTL_V2eV9aFhQgOaoJMuuLtv3jeO6l6J ktQbHaJaMKzTeYhz7MeRNzs&sig=AHIEtbS9QUib89sKiUFGNLP0yrHKuRuhHg) (Link (http://rumkin.com/reference/dnd/media/classconstruction.pdf) directly to the PDF if the Google Docs one doesn't work.)

At any rate, it's basically a point-buy construction system. Different types of abilities are worth different amounts of points - mind you, this includes hit dice, BAB, saves, and spellcasting - and you continue buying abilities until you've bought 250 or so points worth of them, which is considered the balance point.

Unfortunately, the engine completely fails at this. All of the full spellcasters are the cheapest to make in terms of this ability pointbuy - yes, including the druid, but at least he's undercut by the barbarian and fighter in terms of point cost. The Wizard and Sorceror, under the engine system, take 235 and 215 points to make, respectively.

As for the monk?

287. The most expensive to construct by a long shot - the breakdowns are even in the document.

The CCE is an interesting concept, but it's really not well thought-out, and a far cry from being able to balance anything.

Also, ninja'd, though I'd like to think that my post was more informative. :smalltongue:

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 01:57 PM
You mean this one? (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:NlFA3-extYYJ:rumkin.com/reference/dnd/media/classconstruction.pdf+%22class+construction+engine %22&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjvWQL0g4CNiNCuaVKgEQO6YR6cyafYhup9Qmm-zDJsv2bT6q2Wz8znfLTze4-NbhF53CWSiLwbJAm2cyTL_V2eV9aFhQgOaoJMuuLtv3jeO6l6J ktQbHaJaMKzTeYhz7MeRNzs&sig=AHIEtbS9QUib89sKiUFGNLP0yrHKuRuhHg) (Link (http://rumkin.com/reference/dnd/media/classconstruction.pdf) directly to the PDF if the Google Docs one doesn't work.)

Look 3.0 too. From how the ranger didn't have an Animal Companion and was listed as having a d10 HD.

Esser-Z
2010-11-09, 02:51 PM
That's hilarious, Break.

Eldariel
2010-11-09, 03:12 PM
That list is incredible. From the "most powerful" to "least powerful", classes go as follows:


Monk - 287
Bard - 276
Paladin - 257
Rogue - 251
Druid - 250
Barbarian/Fighter - 245
Cleric - 240
Ranger - 237
Wizard - 235
Sorcerer - 215



Poor, poor Sorcerer. If only he was within the same plane of awesome as the Monk. Honestly, that list is almost inverse of what is actually true; Druid is the one strong class that manages average and Bard and Rogue are the average classes that manages strong results. Other than that, Ranger would be too high in the inverse system, Fighter should be slightly under the Barbarian and of course, Sorc slightly under Druid. It is frighteningly accurate in the reverse tho. The fundamental issues are that:
- Spellcasting is undervalued. A lot.
- Synergy of class features is not taken into account.
- Scaling of class features is not taken into account.
- Some abilities are just evaluated poorly. Every one-time ability being worth as much as a feat (!!) makes Monk's score ridiculously inflated, for example.

Esser-Z
2010-11-09, 03:27 PM
Oh wow. Just... wow. I'm not sure what else I can say except wow a few more times.

Susano-wo
2010-11-09, 03:33 PM
Look 3.0 too. From how the ranger didn't have an AC and was listed as having a d10 HD.

DIdn't have AC? what?

and yeah, I was excited at the CCE, when I first downloaded it. too bad the numbers are all off ; ;

Eloel
2010-11-09, 03:35 PM
DIdn't have AC? what?

and yeah, I was excited at the CCE, when I first downloaded it. too bad the numbers are all off ; ;

AC = Animal Companion in that context. Whether they had it, I have no idea.

Eldariel
2010-11-09, 03:42 PM
AC = Animal Companion in that context. Whether they had it, I have no idea.

You know what's scary? I played 3.0 for years and had to check. I guess that tells how many above-1st-level-dip-for-TWF+Ambi Rangers we played back then. But no, they did not.

Mushroom Ninja
2010-11-09, 03:43 PM
Monk - 287
Bard - 276
Paladin - 257
Rogue - 251
Druid - 250
Barbarian/Fighter - 245
Cleric - 240
Ranger - 237
Wizard - 235
Sorcerer - 215



Unless my math is off, we could give Wizards full Cleric casting (Minus Domain spells) in addition to their other stuff, to put them at 266 points -- still less than monk. This is obviously a well-designed test of balance.

Break
2010-11-09, 03:56 PM
....here's an awful question. How many points are needed to create the Lightning Warrior?

Eloel
2010-11-09, 03:57 PM
....here's an awful question. How many points are needed to create the Lightning Warrior?

Yes.
Sorry...

Greenish
2010-11-09, 04:10 PM
....here's an awful question. How many points are needed to create the Lightning Warrior?Going by the first thing that came up in google (http://www.myth-weavers.com/wiki/index.php/Lightning_Warrior), 566.


d20 HD - 90 CP (extrapolated)
weapon prof - 25
armour prof - 10
skill points - 45
class skills - 30
alignment - 0
BAB - 50
saves - 35
spell capability - 10
arcane spells - 180 (discounting ones from high int)
known unlimited spells - 15
feats (mystical) - 50
feats (general) - 35

Funny how extra 1st level spell is equal in points cost to an extra 9th level spell.

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 04:18 PM
....here's an awful question. How many points are needed to create the Lightning Warrior?

Lightning warrior (http://www.myth-weavers.com/wiki/index.php/Lightning_Warrior) stats as best as I could find them. The original being destroyed.

d20 HD = estimated at 60 CP (or many decades of incarceration)
6+int skill points = 45 CP
Class Skills 28 = 30 CP

subtotal = 135

Martial + Simple Weapon Proficiencies = 25 CP
Light Armor Proficiency = 10 CP
Full BAB = 50 CP
Greater Restriction (can't survive without 18 in all stats/18 stats required) = -10 CP
All Good Saves = 35 CP

sub total = 110

Spell Capability = 10 CP
No Limit on Spells Known = 15 CP
Armored Casting = 10 CP
Arcane Spells(6 spells per day of 10 spell levels * 2) = 120 CP

sub total = 155

5 bonus feats fighter(5 CP each) or metamagic/item creation(10 CP each)... 25 to 50 CP. so let's say = 50 CP.
TWF line of special abilities 7 bonus feats = 35 CP

sub total = 85 CP

Total CP = 85+155+110+135 = 105+150+110+130= 255+240= 495 CP

Edit: 85+10 +150+110+130 = 15 +80 +150+110+130 = 100+130+110+130 + 15 = 225+260 = 485 CP



Edit: 485 CP

Doug Lampert
2010-11-09, 04:22 PM
Unless my math is off, we could give Wizards full Cleric casting (Minus Domain spells) in addition to their other stuff, to put them at 266 points -- still less than monk. This is obviously a well-designed test of balance.

Give them Domain spells too. Of course to balance that you'll have to take away something REALLY valuable. Maybe you could give up the familiar. (Checks document. Familiar is 15 points, the first domain is 9, the second is 5. Yep, that covers it. What to do with the extra point? Something "worthless" like an extra nineth level cleric slot. Note, that's a nineth level cleric slot from level 1 on, there's no provision in the document for delayed abilities being worth less or early abilities worth more so since a ninth level spell slot for a divine caster is worth 1 point, that's the cost.)

I'd seen this document before, but forgotten how silly it was.

Let's look at some other stuff, for Barbarians illiteracy is -5 points, you can buy it off for two skill points or by taking ONE level in any other PC class, and its a disadvantage which needs a bonus feat to compensate. Note that based on their costs for skill points those two skill points are worth less than 2/3rds of a construction point!

A druid's animal companion is worth 5 points? Really, IIRC animal companions tended to be worth a lot less in 3.0, but 1/3rd the value of a familiar or the same as a single fighter bonus feat?

Casting a SINGLE level 0 spell once per day is 5 points, but casting a ninth level cleric spell is only 1 point for a cleric? Does this even START to make sense? Miracle, Gate, and Mass Heal are all available in 3.0.

DougL

Lans
2010-11-09, 04:25 PM
You know what's scary? I played 3.0 for years and had to check. I guess that tells how many above-1st-level-dip-for-TWF+Ambi Rangers we played back then. But no, they did not.

Didn't they have Animal Friendship on there spell list? I recall that being the reason why the ranger had an AC of 1/2 the druid level in the conversion.

RanWilde
2010-11-09, 04:25 PM
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Monk,_Tome_(3.5e_Class)

When a member in my group wants to play a monk.

Greenish
2010-11-09, 04:27 PM
Lightning warrior (http://www.myth-weavers.com/wiki/index.php/Lightning_Warrior) stats as best as I could find them. The original being destroyed.

d20 HD = estimated at 60 CP (or many decades of incarceration)
6+int skill points = 45 CP
Class Skills 28 = 30 CP

subtotal = 135

Martial + Simple Weapon Proficiencies = 25 CP
Light Armor Proficiency = 10 CP
Full BAB = 50 CP
Greater Restriction (can't survive without 18 in all stats/18 stats required) = -10 CP
All Good Saves = 35 CP

sub total = 110

Spell Capability = 10 CP
No Limit on Spells Known = 15 CP
Armored Casting = 10 CP
Arcane Spells(6 spells per day of 10 spell levels * 2) = 120 CP

sub total = 155

5 bonus feats fighter(5 CP each) or metamagic/item creation(10 CP each)... 25 to 50 CP. so let's say = 50 CP.
TWF line of special abilities 7 bonus feats = 35 CP

sub total = 85 CP

Total CP = 85+155+110+135 = 105+150+110+130= 255+240= 495 CP



495 CPThe abilities description is not a mechanical limitation. I got the spells wrong and forgot the Armoured Casting (which I'd peg at Excellent).

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 04:32 PM
The abilities description is not a mechanical limitation. I got the spells wrong and forgot the Armoured Casting (which I'd peg at Excellent).

Their sample abilities included casting in light armor with no ASF as worth 10 points, hence the score i gave it. So 495 was right after all. x.x

Susano-wo
2010-11-09, 04:35 PM
ooooh! animal companion! I was scratching my head over how they oculd possibly have prevented the ranger from having an Armor Class >.>

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 04:35 PM
Didn't they have Animal Friendship on there spell list? I recall that being the reason why the ranger had an AC of 1/2 the druid level in the conversion.

Apparently they did. (http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html)
Animal Friendship
Enchantment (Charm) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Drd 1, Rgr 1
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One animal
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
The character wins the loyalty of an animal. The spell functions only if the character actually wishes to be the animal's friend. If the character is not willing to treat the animal as a the spell fails. An animal's loyalty is natural (not magical) and lasting.
The character can teach the befriended animal three specific tricks or tasks for each point of Intelligence it possesses. They cannot be complex (complex tricks require the Handle Animal skill).
At most, the character can have animal friends whose Hit Dice total no more than twice the character’s caster level (though the demands of adventuring generally restrict a character to half that number).
The character may dismiss animal friends to enable the character to befriend new ones.

Eldariel
2010-11-09, 04:36 PM
Didn't they have Animal Friendship on there spell list? I recall that being the reason why the ranger had an AC of 1/2 the druid level in the conversion.

Ah yes, indeed. You are quite correct, they did. Well, that explains a thing or two.

Greenish
2010-11-09, 04:40 PM
Their sample abilities included casting in light armor with no ASF as worth 10 points, hence the score i gave it. So 495 was right after all. x.xOh right, it was hidden in the PrC section so I missed it. (I also tried to look for it from the bard's entry, like the noob I am. :smallredface:)

[Edit]: I'm not sure how you came up with mere 60 points for d20 HD. I assumed it increased by 10 for every two points.

Kurald Galain
2010-11-09, 06:50 PM
At any rate, it's basically a point-buy construction system. Different types of abilities are worth different amounts of points - mind you, this includes hit dice, BAB, saves, and spellcasting - and you continue buying abilities until you've bought 250 or so points worth of them, which is considered the balance point.

You know the funny thing? Second edition actually had an official version of this list (well, an optional rule in the DMG for creating your own classes, anyway). It was hilarious: you could give yourself full casting in two schools, thac0 better than a fighter, and lots of hit points, "penalize" yourself by getting a mandatory alignment and owning no more than ten magical items, and end up with something that requires less XP to level up than a rogue does. Yay!

true_shinken
2010-11-09, 07:06 PM
Let's look at some other stuff, for Barbarians illiteracy is -5 points, you can buy it off for two skill points or by taking ONE level in any other PC class, and its a disadvantage which needs a bonus feat to compensate. Note that based on their costs for skill points those two skill points are worth less than 2/3rds of a construction point!

Multiclassing didn't solve illiteracy back in 3.0 (I just realized it does solve it in 3.5 very recently). It's nor worth -5 anyway.


You know the funny thing? Second edition actually had an official version of this list (well, an optional rule in the DMG for creating your own classes, anyway). It was hilarious: you could give yourself full casting in two schools, thac0 better than a fighter, and lots of hit points, "penalize" yourself by getting a mandatory alignment and owning no more than ten magical items, and end up with something that requires less XP to level up than a rogue does. Yay!
Oh, I remember that. But I thought all such classes had level caps at 14 and took quite some XP to level up.
The book does mention 'don't screw with the rules, kid' though. :smallbiggrin:

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 07:18 PM
Oh right, it was hidden in the PrC section so I missed it. (I also tried to look for it from the bard's entry, like the noob I am. :smallredface:)

[Edit]: I'm not sure how you came up with mere 60 points for d20 HD. I assumed it increased by 10 for every two points.

That's one way of doing things, probably the better way. I just added 10 as it was the next size up.

Skjaldbakka
2010-11-10, 12:13 AM
What I am getting out of this thread is that my next character for a tabletop D&D game is going to be a bard, wading into battle two-handing a longsword with power attack and self buffs. I think there are even some feats that might let me hit medium or heavy armor and keep my spellcasting ability.

Coidzor
2010-11-10, 12:36 AM
What I am getting out of this thread is that my next character for a tabletop D&D game is going to be a bard, wading into battle two-handing a longsword with power attack and self buffs. I think there are even some feats that might let me hit medium or heavy armor and keep my spellcasting ability.

Battle Caster, from Complete Arcane.

Esser-Z
2010-11-10, 07:44 AM
What I am getting out of this thread is that my next character for a tabletop D&D game is going to be a bard, wading into battle two-handing a longsword with power attack and self buffs. I think there are even some feats that might let me hit medium or heavy armor and keep my spellcasting ability.
Same! Except I'm going a step farther and splurging a feat (low-op environment) on a greatsword.

Eloel
2010-11-10, 08:05 AM
Same! Except I'm going a step farther and splurging a feat (low-op environment) on a greatsword.

May I suggest actually using a Longsword two-handed? The difference in average damage is 2.5 (2d6 averages 7, 1d8 averages 4.5), and when you're desperate (like climbing, holding something in your 2nd hand [playing a flute!], etc.), you can actually use it one-handed.

Edit: My point being, even if you didn't spend a feat on the greatsword, I think longsword is the better choice for a bard. Spending a feat? Really, waste of a feat.

Greenish
2010-11-10, 08:50 AM
That's one way of doing things, probably the better way. I just added 10 as it was the next size up.What, are you saying that d14, d16 and d18 don't exist? :smalltongue:

What I am getting out of this thread is that my next character for a tabletop D&D game is going to be a bard, wading into battle two-handing a longsword with power attack and self buffs. I think there are even some feats that might let me hit medium or heavy armor and keep my spellcasting ability.Heavy armour won't probably be worth it. Judicious ToB dipping, on the other hand, most certainly is.

Edit: My point being, even if you didn't spend a feat on the greatsword, I think longsword is the better choice for a bard. Spending a feat? Really, waste of a feat.And if you're burning a feat, might as well go for an exotic weapon.

Esser-Z
2010-11-10, 09:20 AM
May I suggest actually using a Longsword two-handed? The difference in average damage is 2.5 (2d6 averages 7, 1d8 averages 4.5), and when you're desperate (like climbing, holding something in your 2nd hand [playing a flute!], etc.), you can actually use it one-handed.

Edit: My point being, even if you didn't spend a feat on the greatsword, I think longsword is the better choice for a bard. Spending a feat? Really, waste of a feat.
Hm. I like big swords. 'Tis a personality quirk. But you're... probably right--I was thinking about the math myself, earlier. I should do that. Lets me use, say, a wand while still being armed, too, in a pinch, which might matter. Or, hell, *cast* and remain armed. I was a silly. :smalltongue:


(I'd go for ToB dipping, what with my love for the book, but, uh, the game's just PHB, PHBII, and the Completes)

Aquillion
2010-11-12, 01:17 AM
Spring attack. Can be used to disarm or trip, if you want. Or deliver contact poison, if that's your thing.

Alternatively, charge+grapple. I've seen it work just fine, with the monk holding the girallon still while the warlock and fighter did the real damage. Worked on the dragon, too. Worked on everything.Fighters are better at both of these due to having full BAB (and bonus feats -- the things you mentioned are all just feats.)


And while you argue in terms of theoretical mechanics, I've seen monks do great things at the table. I guess it's not about the class, but the player.A clever player will be able to use any class better than a stupid player would have used that class, but they still have less to work with if their class is weaker.

You can do clever things and accomplish things at the table while playing a Commoner. But the same clever player could always accomplish more with a better class. This is true of monks as well -- your clever charge + grapple player would have been better at their chosen strategy as a fighter with Improved Grapple (let alone a grapple-focused Druid, but we'll leave Tier 1 classes out of it.)

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-12, 03:19 AM
You can do clever things and accomplish things at the table while playing a Commoner.

like summon an infinite swarm of chicken as a FLAW (giving you a free feat in the process).

JaronK
2010-11-12, 04:57 AM
like summon an infinite swarm of chicken as a FLAW (giving you a free feat in the process).

Single greatest flaw in existence.

JaronK

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-12, 05:02 AM
Single greatest flaw in existence.

JaronK

pity about the Commoner Prereq, i seriously considered taking first level in commoner before Multiclassing into Rogue just for that ability

turkishproverb
2010-11-12, 05:33 AM
I once played a commoner with that "Flaw" and then took Weapon Proficiency: Chicken.

Radar
2010-11-12, 08:52 AM
pity about the Commoner Prereq, i seriously considered taking first level in commoner before Multiclassing into Rogue just for that ability
Rogue? My take on it:
Chicken Infested + Greater Cleave + Sweeping Strike = Profit! :smalltongue:

thompur
2010-11-12, 09:30 AM
What is the dowside of being "chicken infested"?

sonofzeal
2010-11-12, 09:32 AM
What is the dowside of being "chicken infested"?
Not being able to retrieve non-chicken items from your pack without difficulty.

Kurald Galain
2010-11-12, 09:34 AM
Not being able to retrieve non-chicken items from your pack without difficulty.

Plus, you know, having a level of commoner.

sonofzeal
2010-11-12, 10:53 AM
Plus, you know, having a level of commoner.
That can be salvaged, you know. :smallamused:

Radar
2010-11-12, 11:33 AM
That can be salvaged, you know. :smallamused:
As they have Handle Animals as a class skill. :smallcool:

sonofzeal
2010-11-12, 11:36 AM
As they have Handle Animals as a class skill. :smallcool:
"Chickens and Battletitans: A Commoner's Tale"

blackjack217
2010-11-12, 11:47 AM
Quick question Is touch of golden ice a good feat for a monk? The non-scaling dc is a problem but at low levels it can be pretty brutal.

Esser-Z
2010-11-12, 11:53 AM
As they have Handle Animals as a class skill. :smallcool:
Teach the horde of chickens to attack on command. Unless your target has DR, it WILL die.


Meanwhile, sudden alternative better-monk: Totemist. Reflavor a bit so you're punching instead of clawing and the soulmelds are non-visible, and you're pretty much there. Landshark Boots let you move acrobatically and attack in the same turn, and a little later you can get regular ol' Pounce.

Unarmed Swordsage probably works better, but have some varation!

Radar
2010-11-12, 01:33 PM
Teach the horde of chickens to attack on command. Unless your target has DR, it WILL die.
There was also a class feature (i guess - i can't recall), that allowed you to give everyone in an area the best BAB of the group (so at least yours). Have a Bard cohort with Dragonfire Inspiration and suddenly you have infinite dangerous minions.

Coidzor
2010-11-12, 02:00 PM
"Chickens and Battletitans: A Commoner's Tale"

Chickens... 12 gods. Warbeast Chickens...:smalleek:

Oracle_Hunter
2010-11-12, 04:17 PM
There was also a class feature (i guess - i can't recall), that allowed you to give everyone in an area the best BAB of the group (so at least yours). Have a Bard cohort with Dragonfire Inspiration and suddenly you have infinite dangerous minions.
Does that mean they would be dance fighting? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0140.html) :smalltongue:

SITB
2010-11-12, 04:28 PM
There was also a class feature (i guess - i can't recall), that allowed you to give everyone in an area the best BAB of the group (so at least yours). Have a Bard cohort with Dragonfire Inspiration and suddenly you have infinite dangerous minions.

So something like this (http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=52) happens?

Theodoxus
2010-11-12, 05:44 PM
Someday, I want the first response to an OP QQing about why monk isn't ubersauce to simply say 'everyone else was wrong, you're right! Monks ARE awesome'. /thread.

That. would. be. epic.

Kurald Galain
2010-11-12, 05:52 PM
Someday, I want the first response to an OP QQing about why monk isn't ubersauce to simply say 'everyone else was wrong, you're right! Monks ARE awesome'.

I'm pretty sure that has happened a few times. It didn't strike me as epic, really. There's also been a few guides posted that attempt to "prove" something about monks.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-11-12, 06:07 PM
The non-scaling dc is a problem but at low levels it can be pretty brutal.

that can be used to describe almost ALL Monk class features so go for it

Boci
2010-11-12, 06:09 PM
I'm pretty sure that has happened a few times. It didn't strike me as epic, really. There's also been a few guides posted that attempt to "prove" something about monks.

Or The Cube, as the mainstream optimizers refer to such tactics.

Signmaker
2010-11-12, 10:05 PM
Or The Cube, as the mainstream optimizers refer to such tactics.

Oh god, that thing.

"A box rams in to you"
"Okay."
"I need seven saves"
"Wait, what"

Round 2
"I need seven more saves. It rammed you again"
"Wait, WHAT?"

The only fight I've ever 'won' due to old age. Though it was really a tie.