Monk... Why do they suck?

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Gwendol

My bad.

The build is terrible with the poor sod looking more like a giant caterpillar than anything else. My point was really not to try and prove the monk is better than the wizard, just that they are not quite as bad as one can think reading this board. Also, they can be a lot of fun to play: I'm on my second.

Quoting myself from page 1:

Originally Posted by Gnaeus

Good. If everyone is having fun, monk is fine. People should play what they like. If your group, as they play, begin learning what works better in the system, and the monk can't compete with the Druid Bear riding a Bear while summoning Bears, now you know why.

What I have taken away from this debate is that core Wizard has a bit of difficulty dealing with a Monk if he finds himself caught in melee, unbuffed, loses initiative, and he cannot use any spells involving SR, an attack roll, a saving throw or a summons. If the monk is prebuffed, using non-monk classes and non core, the monk can win that fight. Of course, if the wizard can also use the same sources, OR if the wizard can enter with permanent or long duration effects up, monk has 0 chance.

But ultimately, the result of a duel under highly unlikely conditions is meaningless other than seeing if it can be done. Under a "same encounter test" where the wizard gets to cast his normal morning buffs, the high level wizard can pretty easily win at least 4-8 encounters in a day, whereas the monk, even with goliath and pounce, is going to have difficulty winning any encounters where "I charge it" isn't a factor, and even then may have problems.

[Malevolence]

Originally Posted by LordBlades

Your build mainly draws it's strength from being a Goliath Lion Totem Barbarian not from being a Monk. You can replace those monk levels with anything but commoner, and the build will probably increase in power.

I think Commoner would be an improvement. Infested with Chickens = Bag of Rats tricks.

Originally Posted by Gwendol

No. I could just as well have used a Catfolk monk 19 with the pounce feat and ending up doing more or less the same damage. The Goliath is not required for this particular attack, but his powerful build makes grappling, etc, more fun.

The build centers on getting double damage on a charge (flying kick), and from the many arms, thus making the power attack count. FoB and being hasted helps quite a lot.

Catfolk Pounce has limitations that regular Pounce does not. And in that case it's still coming from being a cat girl, not from your classes. Make it a Catfolk any other class 19, same applies.

[Gwendol]

I thought I said the barbarian was unnecessary (he can't even rage). Catfolk is all monk and can still do the same damage.

Of course the wizard (or CoDzilla) will win if pre-buffs are allowed: they're tier one!

Malevolence's argument about pouncing can be applied to all pouncer (charger) builds: this is a monk charger build. If you take away the unarmed strike and monk levels you will not get anything out of flying kick, or the improved natural weapon feat, so being a monk is central. That said, I'm sure there are charger builds that laugh at the damage output of this monk.

[Malevolence]

Sorcerer 20 with Superior Unarmed Strike, Greater Mighty Whallop, and a Fanged Ring. Or the classic Harm punching Cleric, proven to one shot Monks or your money back.

...Even in a purely unarmed context, Monks are still terrible, and other classes still do it better.

[LordBlades]

damn double posting.

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Gwendol

I thought I said the barbarian was unnecessary (he can't even rage). Catfolk is all monk and can still do the same damage.

Of course the wizard (or CoDzilla) will win if pre-buffs are allowed: they're tier one!

Malevolence's argument about pouncing can be applied to all pouncer (charger) builds: this is a monk charger build. If you take away the unarmed strike and monk levels you will not get anything out of flying kick, or the improved natural weapon feat, so being a monk is central. That said, I'm sure there are charger builds that laugh at the damage output of this monk.

Well, your damage also depends on some other factors. The wizard has to be flat-footed. The monk has to know that the wizard is flat footed (or else the catfolk charge pounce fails). The monk has to invest in power attack, which is only actually useful for him because he knows that he is rolling only nat 20s. That isn't just a wizard slaying build, it is a wizard slaying build specifically designed for a world where it only rolls 20s, fighting only flatfooted opponents.

[LordBlades]

Originally Posted by Gwendol

Malevolence's argument about pouncing can be applied to all pouncer (charger) builds: this is a monk charger build. If you take away the unarmed strike and monk levels you will not get anything out of flying kick, or the improved natural weapon feat, so being a monk is central. That said, I'm sure there are charger builds that laugh at the damage output of this monk.

Unarmed Strike is not monk specific. Any character can select Imp Unarmed Strike and Superior unarmed Strike and deal almost same damage as a monk (2d6 vs. 2d10 for medium) and Flying Kick requires nothing Monk specific.

A Catfolk Aristocrat (to choose a completely featureless medium BAB class) would do exactly the same thing as your build.

Using that build as an argument that a monk is not bad is like using Pun Pun as an argument that the Paladin is in fact Tier 0.

Not to mention it's a bit debatable if the Flying Kick from Complete Warrior isn't the 3.5 reprint of the OA Flying Kick, given the exact same name, prerequisites and similar effect.

[Tokuhara]

Halfling Monk substitution fixes one of the problems of monk: the Flurry of Misses ability. You get skirmish instead. See? Wizards CAN tell when they screwed up!

I personally played a Strongheart Halfling Monk 6/Acolyte of the Fist 10/Kensei 4 who was surprisingly effective as a hit & run striker. Granted, he was no Psionic Fist cheese, nor Unarmed Swordsage/Crusader/Master of 9, but he did what he was designed to do. Heck, I once played a Half-Fire Elemental Earth Elemental Monk/Tattooed Monk

[Veyr]

Skirmish on a melee character is not particularly good design: it encapsulates the nonsynergistic problems of the Monk in a single feature! Bonus damage dice depend on multiple attacks in order to work, but moving 10' in order to trigger Skirmish without losing all but one attack is relatively difficult. Skirmish really doesn't help the Monk very much at all, IMO.

And "Psionic Fist cheese"? Using a feat... as intended... is cheese? It's not even a particularly powerful feat; it has the same problem as Skirmish in that it requires (at least) a Move Action to activate (usually).

[Tokuhara]

Originally Posted by Veyr

Skirmish on a melee character is not particularly good design: it encapsulates the nonsynergistic problems of the Monk in a single feature! Bonus damage dice depend on multiple attacks in order to work, but moving 10' in order to trigger Skirmish without losing all but one attack is relatively difficult. Skirmish really doesn't help the Monk very much at all, IMO.

And "Psionic Fist cheese"? Using a feat... as intended... is cheese? It's not even a particularly powerful feat; it has the same problem as Skirmish in that it requires (at least) a Move Action to activate (usually).

I meant the Psion/monk synergy feat

and I never hit more than once. One punch is all I need to hurt you

[Gwendol]

Originally Posted by LordBlades

Unarmed Strike is not monk specific. Any character can select Imp Unarmed Strike and Superior unarmed Strike and deal almost same damage as a monk (2d6 vs. 2d10 for medium) and Flying Kick requires nothing Monk specific.

A Catfolk Aristocrat (to choose a completely featureless medium BAB class) would do exactly the same thing as your build.

Using that build as an argument that a monk is not bad is like using Pun Pun as an argument that the Paladin is in fact Tier 0.

Not to mention it's a bit debatable if the Flying Kick from Complete Warrior isn't the 3.5 reprint of the OA Flying Kick, given the exact same name, prerequisites and similar effect.

No, but improved natural weapon does. And a catfolk aristocrat would miss out on the two hits from FoB.

[Veyr]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I meant the Psion/monk synergy feat

Oh, Tashalatora? Yeah, no, that's pretty much the Monk-as-it-should-be, IMO. It's an excellently designed feat.

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

and I never hit more than once. One punch is all I need to hurt you

With your 2d10+7d6+10 punch? (that's Monk 20 plus full Imp. Skrimish damage and 30 Str) What are you fighting that averages less than 45 HP?

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I meant the Psion/monk synergy feat

and I never hit more than once. One punch is all I need to hurt you

Unless you're also rocking hardcore power attack shenanigans on this same chassis, then it's painfully easy to dodge a once per round attack. The fact that you're requiring this one, singular attack to do everything is, well, far-fetched.

[Tokuhara]

Originally Posted by Thrice Dead Cat

Unless you're also rocking hardcore power attack shenanigans on this same chassis, then it's painfully easy to dodge a once per round attack. The fact that you're requiring this one, singular attack to do everything is, well, far-fetched.

Still, I don't see anyone else coming up with a better idea.

[Keld Denar]

Tashalatoran King of Smack.

Expand up to Huge size, take Imp Natural Attack, manifest Weapon of the Vampire, and bludgeon people to death with your 16d6 hamfists. Even better, take Robiliar's Gambit. Your foe hits you, shaves off some of your temp HP, and then you hit them back and regain that temp HP. They have to deal more damage per hit than half of your damage just to get through your temp HP. Its like having DR X/-, where X is half of your UAS damage.

Thats a better monk idea.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

Still, I don't see anyone else coming up with a better idea.

That's because those better ideas either have already been mentioned (Psychic Warrior X/Monk 2/Slayer Y (or, hell, just moar Psy Warrior) with Tashalatora to get all the good monk class features covers all you want and more.


That or just be a bear with a silly hat and built and pretend that you are, in fact, a 5th level monk.

[Malevolence]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I meant the Psion/monk synergy feat

and I never hit more than once. One punch is all I need to hurt you

That one's falling flat.

[Tokuhara]

Originally Posted by Thrice Dead Cat

That's because those better ideas either have already been mentioned (Psychic Warrior X/Monk 2/Slayer Y (or, hell, just moar Psy Warrior) with Tashalatora to get all the good monk class features covers all you want and more.


That or just be a bear with a silly hat and built and pretend that you are, in fact, a 5th level monk.

ugh... I just like to think that Wizards knew what they were doing when they built these classes. I don't game with Powergamers, and thus I avoid "I hit you for a million damageand you die " tactic. I prefer to build a better mousetrap with what I'm allowed to work with. As it was, we had a "No Psionics, No ToB" rule in place, so I just ran with what I was given. I avoided the Flurry of Misses, Bolstered my Damage with feats and class abilities (AotF raises the die size twice, took Superior Unarmed Strike, and Kensei enchants the crap out of my fists), and even used Traits/Feats to aid me (Quick trait, Improved Initiative, Yondalla's Senses). I wound up doing serious damage

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

ugh... I just like to think that Wizards knew what they were doing when they built these classes. I don't game with Powergamers, and thus I avoid "I hit you for a million damageand you die " tactic. I prefer to build a better mousetrap with what I'm allowed to work with. As it was, we had a "No Psionics, No ToB" rule in place, so I just ran with what I was given. I avoided the Flurry of Misses, Bolstered my Damage with feats and class abilities (AotF raises the die size twice, took Superior Unarmed Strike, and Kensei enchants the crap out of my fists), and even used Traits/Feats to aid me (Quick trait, Improved Initiative, Yondalla's Senses). I wound up doing serious damage

After a certain point, damage is just straight up murder. The difference between 1000 damage and 100000 damage is the amount dice it got you there. The real dirty tricks are means to avoid that death trap not just once, but up until it is also now your turn and can fire your own form of death laser back at the bugger.

As for the "No Psionics, no ToB" rules... all the borked stuff is core anyhow. Psionics is an intuitive system for casting that works without yes options to say no ways to you winning. ToB provides meleers with fewer options than even psionics get that allow them to do more than just "lol full attack" or "lol one big spring attack (hope I don't miss this one, too!)."

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

ugh... I just like to think that Wizards knew what they were doing when they built these classes.

I like to think that if I don't pay my bills long enough that they will roll from the negative all the way around into a positive and send me a big refund check. Unfortunately, evidence is against us, Tokuhara.

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I prefer to build a better mousetrap with what I'm allowed to work with. As it was, we had a "No Psionics, No ToB" rule in place, so I just ran with what I was given. I avoided the Flurry of Misses, Bolstered my Damage with feats and class abilities (AotF raises the die size twice, took Superior Unarmed Strike, and Kensei enchants the crap out of my fists), and even used Traits/Feats to aid me (Quick trait, Improved Initiative, Yondalla's Senses). I wound up doing serious damage

Serious damage is something that can kill a mook in a round, or hit a powerful enemy hard enough that he has to think to decide whether he needs to kill you, or that spellcaster mumbling ancient words in the back of the party. Nothing you have described amounts to serious damage.

[Tokuhara]

Originally Posted by Gnaeus

I like to think that if I don't pay my bills long enough that they will roll from the negative all the way around into a positive and send me a big refund check. Unfortunately, evidence is against us, Tokuhara.

Can I add this to my Signature?

Originally Posted by Gnaeus

Serious damage is something that can kill a mook in a round, or hit a powerful enemy hard enough that he has to think to decide whether he needs to kill you, or that spellcaster mumbling ancient words in the back of the party. Nothing you have described amounts to serious damage.

Correction: Legitemate Threat

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

Can I add this to my Signature?

Certainly.

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

Correction: Legitemate Threat

How is that different?

[Tokuhara]

Originally Posted by Gnaeus

How is that different?

I wasn't sitting on my hands and standing around waiting to get killed. I was doing decent damage every turn (comparable to our fighter) and was actually hitting pretty consistantly

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I wasn't sitting on my hands and standing around waiting to get killed. I was doing decent damage every turn (comparable to our fighter) and was actually hitting pretty consistantly

Well, you did say that you didn't play with powergamers. In a fighter, monk, ninja, healer, adept group, that should work ok. If you play with tier 1-3 classes that are using their powers at all effectively (by which I mean not wierd TO or Gate/Wish/Time Stop/Shapechange, but merely employing one of the manylots of spells that can end a fight or cripple a major enemy in one round) "comparable to our fighter" is less of a ringing endorsement than it is a criticism.

[Malevolence]

People really need to stop with the "in a low tier group, it's fine" argument. Even if the rest of the party sucks too, the enemies don't. And that is the actual standard you are being compared to. Which means being about equal to a Fighter is a bad thing, because you're not playing against the Fighter, you're playing with him against BBEG the Mook Eater.

[Gnaeus]

Most of the time, DMs balance difficulty rating to party power. A low-op group is probably better balanced against similar CR encounters than a high-op group, which sometimes requires bringing out monsters that can one-shot PCs just to make fights challenging.

The common complaint I hear is "How do I make fights to challenge the tier 1 while allowing the tier 5 to remain relevant?"

[The Cat Goddess]

Errata very specifically and clearly notes that the Monk's Belt magic item gives "Wis+1" to AC when worn by a non-Monk. The "works just like a Monk's AC bonus" is there to indicate:

1) Doesn't work if you wear armor.
2) Doesn't work if you're encumbered (beyond light encumberance).
3) Doesn't work if you have a shield.
4) Doesn't work if you're helpless (tied up, asleep, etc.).
5) Works if you're flat-footed.
6) Works against Touch Attacks.

On a slight tangent...

Would you allow someone to craft a Monk's Belt that gave "Int+1" instead, if they had the Kung Fu Genius (or Carmendine Monk) Feat? How about "Cha+1" if they had the Aesthetic Mage Feat?

[TroubleBrewing]

Originally Posted by Tokuhara

I wasn't sitting on my hands and standing around waiting to get killed. I was doing decent damage every turn (comparable to our fighter) and was actually hitting pretty consistantly

Anecdotal evidence = logical fallacy.

While the "evidence" you presented may in fact be true (You were able to keep up with the fighter and not feel useless), that does not change the fact that monks are bad.

[Malevolence]

Originally Posted by Gnaeus

Most of the time, DMs balance difficulty rating to party power. A low-op group is probably better balanced against similar CR encounters than a high-op group, which sometimes requires bringing out monsters that can one-shot PCs just to make fights challenging.

The common complaint I hear is "How do I make fights to challenge the tier 1 while allowing the tier 5 to remain relevant?"

While there is no maximum baseline of competence, there is a minimum one. Things like Fighters and Monks are below the bar. Anything you use will turn them into a fine red mist. Things that can threaten the actually good classes will do this even more, but the problem is that the Fighter and the Monk aren't tall enough to go on this ride.

Make them an Unarmed Swordsage and a Warblade, and they can generally deal with stock encounters, and can properly handle intelligently played ones.

And threatening an optimized group doesn't require one round kills, though those will often happen anyways because it's D&D, and there's rockets flying around.

[Gnaeus]

Originally Posted by Malevolence

While there is no maximum baseline of competence, there is a minimum one. Things like Fighters and Monks are below the bar. Anything you use will turn them into a fine red mist. Things that can threaten the actually good classes will do this even more, but the problem is that the Fighter and the Monk aren't tall enough to go on this ride.

The bar for the ride is adjustable. Saying that fighters and monks can't kill anything, when clearly they can, is false on its face. A decent DM can compensate for a Fighter, Monk, Ninja, Healer party a LOT more easily than he can make challenging but not overwhelming encounters for a Wizard, Archivist, Druid, Beguiler party. The main reason for this is that the DM knows EXACTLY what the low-op party can do on a given day.

Originally Posted by Malevolence

And threatening an optimized group doesn't require one round kills, though those will often happen anyways because it's D&D, and there's rockets flying around.

It doesn't require it, but it is a common result. If my group regularly breezes through CR+2-3 enemies, and I start throwing CR+4-5 enemies at them to compensate, it is likely that the attacks that they generate are one shot kills against characters 4-5 levels lower than they were expected to fight.