What makes the best monk in your eyes?

[Tytalus]

Kensai requires an XP expenditure for each part of your body you might ever want to use for a strike: 2 fists + 2 feet + 2 elbows + 2 knees + 2 hips + 1 head = 2,000 XP.)

Form a purely mechanical point of view, that is not necessary. There is virtually no difference between a monk with two enchanted fists and another with the laundry list you present here. Except, of course, the second one spent way too many XP.

[Doug Lampert]

Oh yes, because this is a game without spells that tell the future, locate objects, or divine solutions to problems. Problems like where can I buy this item.

Seriously, can we kill this misconception now? A wizard is never late, nor is he early. He shops for precisely what he means to.

Equally to the point, somewhere there are brokers who BUY all the +2 crap your level 12 party sells because you've already got a +4 item of whatever.

They buy your 4,000-8,000 GP item for only 50% of nominal cost (20% in 4th edition), and then sell it for 100% of nominal cost (110%-140% in 4th edition). GOSH, think those guys MIGHT be doing some actual work for all that cash. And they can use the same methods to find customers. People willing to pay 4,000 GP for the item you just purchased for 2,000 GP are a valuable resource. Surely somewhere in the multiverse there's a merchant who's group includes a couple of level 13+ casters willing to spend otherwise unused spell slots for a few thousand gold for the group.

[Telonius]

Really? I've found them to be a mainstay of most D&D campaigns in which I've played and DMed, just as most Druids and Clerics tend to pick up a Monk's Belt (with a Wilding Clasp for the Druid), and everybody picks up a Heward's Handy Haversack. Some items are just too useful to resist.

The -6 to charisma-based checks vs. non-evil characters can be pretty harsh.

[Divide by Zero]

Rather than go down the path of layering your fists in cheese, you could do one of those ridiculous exalted/console fighting game/Final Fantasy N where they use swords that are 2-3 foot wide and 10 foot long.

How about my favorite Exalted weapon? http://wiki.white-wolf.com/exalted/i...ts:Chainklaive

[Doc Roc]

Where's Windrider from? The one in Masters of the Wild doesn't progress casting.

I'm thinking of the faerunian Full BAB full Casting divine class. I may have the name wrong.

[Curmudgeon]

I see you tend to play in evil games, which I presume is the not most common kind.

No, I tend to play in neutral (uncommitted) alignment games, which is the most common kind. By the time characters can afford the cost of Fiendish Wings they're more likely than not to make that daily DC 15 Will save, so they'll only occasionally be pushed into making an evil act. This rarely results in alignment change. As Telonius noted, the real drawback is for Charisma-based checks. That's kept a couple of characters from using that graft, and they've had to look elsewhere to gain flight capability.

[Tytalus]

No, I tend to play in neutral (uncommitted) alignment games, which is the most common kind.

A fair assumption, but nothing more. If you can support that claim, please provide the source.

By the time characters can afford the cost of Fiendish Wings they're more likely than not to make that daily DC 15 Will save, so they'll only occasionally be pushed into making an evil act. This rarely results in alignment change. As Telonius noted, the real drawback is for Charisma-based checks. That's kept a couple of characters from using that graft, and they've had to look elsewhere to gain flight capability.

I guess your gaming experience differs from mine then. A party with multiple characters, several of whom committing evil acts on occasion (not to mention pursuing fiendish items in the first place) wouldn't work in most of the groups I've played in or witnessed.

[Curmudgeon]

A fair assumption, but nothing more. If you can support that claim, please provide the source.

It's one of the default assumptions in the 4th Edition D&D game, at least. From page 19 of that Player's Handbook:

Most people in the world, and plenty of player characters, haven’t signed up to play on any team—they’re unaligned. Picking and adhering to an alignment represents a distinct choice.

Also see the excerpt here.

[Taelas]

Since Good is opposed to Evil and vice versa, and Neutral is not opposed to either, the majority of parties will average out to Neutral, given free alignment choices.

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

Kensai requires an XP expenditure for each part of your body you might ever want to use for a strike: 2 fists + 2 feet + 2 elbows + 2 knees + 2 hips + 1 head = 2,000 XP.)

In regard to this could a Kensai choose his (Skin) as what he enchants? Seeing as he's using his skin to physically hit the people he's punching.

[Malkav]

In regard to this could a Kensai choose his (Skin) as what he enchants? Seeing as he's using his skin to physically hit the people he's punching.

It says;
"The process for imbuing...natural weapons of one type are imbued at 100% of the cost + 10% per natural weapon. For example, a...kensai...may turn his fists into signature weapons for 120% of the XP cost."

[Greenish]

I'm thinking of the faerunian Full BAB full Casting divine class. I may have the name wrong.

Ah, I thought you might be thinking of Windwalker from Faiths and Pantheons. Excellent PrC, though the entry requirements are annoying if you're trying to get in early without losing caster levels.

[Tytalus]

It's one of the default assumptions in the 4th Edition D&D game, at least. From page 19 of that Player's Handbook: Also see the excerpt here.

Doesn't quite apply here (different edition, different alignment system, etc.). Even if it did, "many" still isn't "most".

[Curmudgeon]

Doesn't quite apply here (different edition, different alignment system, etc.). Even if it did, "many" still isn't "most".

"Most people in the world ... haven’t signed up to play on any team—they’re unaligned." I don't see any use of the term "many".

[Tvtyrant]

"Most people in the world ... haven’t signed up to play on any team—they’re unaligned." I don't see any use of the term "many".

I fail to see how the majority of games end up being neutral just because WOTC says so. There is a limit to where RAW can be applied.

I vote going Dungeoncrasher Fighter/Pouncing Barbarian and then getting knockdown and cleave. Then you bullrush charge the enemy into a wall, giving you a full round attack, a trip attempt and a massive amount of flat damage as well as getting to keep hitting people as part of the charge with cleave. Just do it all with your fists and call it a day :P

[Curmudgeon]

I fail to see how the majority of games end up being neutral just because WOTC says so.

If they publish numerous campaign settings and game modules where most of the people (including important NPCs) are unaligned, and PCs want to do things like shop and rest without being rejected as fanatics, then most PCs will at least be able to coexist comfortably with that unaligned majority. It's no guarantee, of course, but it does tend to work out that way in my experience.

[FMArthur]

Really the only alignment patterns I have observed between the six groups I've played with are:

• Players mostly play Chaotic characters
• Evil characters are sometimes disallowed, or frowned upon on account of the undesirability of interparty conflict and the reputation of evil characters played immaturely.

WotC can certainly dictate what most NPCs should be, but player characters depend on the players. Their statements on what the average party might be is in the same tier of rules-authority as their hilarious sidebar advice on how to "min max" TWF in the Rules Compendium, ie their personal opinions and assumptions (misguided or otherwise).

An item that attempts to assert control over its owner in Evil fashion is going to be disruptive or taken with great caution in a large enough number of groups that it is by no means a certainty and should never be a universal game assumption.

[Tytalus]

I don't see any use of the term "many".

My bad, it's "plenty" instead of "many", i.e., even less strong of a statement: "... plenty of player characters, haven’t signed up to play on any team."

We are discussing PCs, obviously, since they are what parties are made of. It doesn't really matter what the mindset of NPCs (or even players) is. Also, the latter WotC is not qualified to judge. Of course, even for PCs, guess is all they can do anyway, especially in the very first rulebook of a new system. In essence, I agree with FMArthur, who put it more eloquently in his post.

And again, completely different game and alignment system (4.0) than what we were actually discussing. Hardly supports the supposed fact you stated about 3.5 games.

And even if it was transferable to 3.5, it is, after all, "plenty", not "most" - which doesn't confirm your claim. As a friend of the RAW I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

If they publish numerous campaign settings and game modules where most of the people (including important NPCs) are unaligned, and PCs want to do things like shop and rest without being rejected as fanatics, then most PCs will at least be able to coexist comfortably with that unaligned majority. It's no guarantee, of course, but it does tend to work out that way in my experience.

I don't follow that argument, especially the apparent premise good/evil = fanatics in the eyes of unaligned neutral populace. I find it hard to take you serious here. Do you really think it takes much for a good/evil characters to "shop and rest without being rejected as fanatics" or "coexist comfortably" with the unaligned (wrong system again!) neutral majority?

Hardly. That doesn't take much, especially if the good/evil PC is actually not a fanatic (in my experience, most aren't. YMMV). And even if they were: even barely clever fanatics can do that. In fact, that's a staple in story/fantasy/adventure/etc. design: the fanatic villain that nobody suspected of his fanaticism. Heck, 3.5 had the "Detect Alignment" line of spells/powers, which would have no use at all if it was indeed as easy as you make it sound to ascertain someone's alignment based on brief contact (rest, shop, etc.).

Seriously, I don't see it.

But to get back to your claim (that most games are neutral): can you actually support it (I'd love to see a study on that), or did you just go a little overboard by stating your opinion as a fact?

An item that attempts to assert control over its owner in Evil fashion is going to be disruptive or taken with great caution in a large enough number of groups that it is by no means a certainty and should never be a universal game assumption.

Right. And even in a neutral group, such an item would cause problems, IMHO. In fact, it seems that the repercussions of succumbing to the item are less severe if you are "good" than when you are "neutral". Ability damage is easily overcome with a spell or a staple magic item, while being forced to commit an evil act can have serious repercussions.

[Mr.Smashy]

*THREAD DERAILED*

It is generally a bad Idea to place stock in the idea that all groups are the same.

If my groups DM told us to make evil characters, half of us would make neutral characters with a penchant for evil. All of us know that the 9 alignments cannot sum up the complexity of the human design. They are meant to be a guideline, providing vague descriptions of the alignments and leaving them open to interpretation.

*@ OP*

Unfortunately, nowadays the monk class is sub-par on a variety of levels. Generally only taken only for the feats, saves, and evasion.

If you are playing a Non-Op game, Monk is more fun than a barrel of macaques. Get items that increase your speed, and start off as a small race that gets good speed and other goodies. WF your fists, and start running at break neck speeds punching the crap out of things. I think it's possible, between spells and feats to get up to 150'/ round. Stupid fun shenanigans.

[Tokuhara]

I have always loved the Halfling Monk racial substitution class, because wizards attempted to fix monk. Now granted, still a fail, but it's clearly better than base monk. At level 1, no "flurry of misses," you get skirmish instead (skirmish is wholly a better mechanic for monk overall)

[Greenish]

If you are playing a Non-Op game

No such thing. Well, unless you roll on all variables of the character at the creation.