Monks are Better than Fighters at high levels.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 976 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

That is entirely contrary to the accepted interpretation (see maneuver master monk for how everyone but you thinks it works) and is yet more proof you're not playing the same game as the rest of us.


Marthkus wrote:

Builds will come later, but from what I can figure at high levels monks will have:

Better AC.

Er, no. A fighter can generally match the monk's AC, if he goes sword & board. If not he's usually close enough that it makes no odds.

Marthkus wrote:
Better Saves.

Granted, but that can be remedied.

Marthkus wrote:
Better immunities.

Granted, but the monk's immunities are generally to things that involve Fort saves that the fighter will make anyway. Of limited usefulness.

Marthkus wrote:
Better SR.

This is not an advantage. As has been pointed out, once you get SR it's main use is to prevent your allies buffing and healing you on the fly.

Marthkus wrote:
Better mobility.

Irrelevant at a level where winged boots or boots of speed cost pocket-change.

Marthkus wrote:
More Attack options.

Huh? The monk has two attack options: run up to it and hit it, or try a maneuver. At high level you can forget maneuvers against most things.

The fighter has hitting things (harder), maneuvers, and ranged attacks. Now sure the monk has quivering palm and stunning fist, but they rely on hitting the target with your fist - and they are not exactly fearsome attacks against the saves most creatures have at this level.

Marthkus wrote:
Better CMB for many maneuvers.

Nope, the fighter's gonna win this one - he adds his weapon training bonus to his CMB, the monk has nothing to add. Even at grappling, the fighter has the option of Brawling armour, and the monk doesn't.

Marthkus wrote:
Better CMD.

Depends if the fighter goes for the favoured class bonus to CMD or not, and bothers with weapon straps, spiked armour, locking gauntlets etc.

Marthkus wrote:
More Skill points.

Granted.

Marthkus wrote:

The only places where the fighter is better is that a fighter will have:

Higher DPR
1 point of health per level more
1 point higher strength
Higher flat footed AC

DPR: the fighter's DPR hinges on two things - raw damage, and his odds to hit. A fighter is generally at top whack +6-7 to hit on the monk, so as AC of the target rises, the fighter has a bigger and bigger advantage over the monk. At this level, a lot of foes can self-buff. You soon reach a point where the monk can't hit reliably at all, and the fighter can. In that circumstance the monk just lost any and all ability to effect his enemy, and can be ignored.

Only one point of health? Never seen that, more like 2 or three (see MAD below). Similar with the strength.

The monk has better touch AC, the fighter better flat-footed AC. I'd say they balance.

Then there's two more factors:

Better weapon enhancement: the fighter can get a full +10 worth of enhancements and properties on his weapon, and it's cheaper. The monk can get +5 of the AoMF.

Then there is the elephant in the room: MAD.

The fighter needs ONE good score, strength. He needs moderate scores in Con and Wis, maybe a touch in Dex and Int if he wants to go for maneuvers. The monk needs two good scores, and the same number of moderate ones. The try as you might, the monk always comes up lacking somewhere unless you dump-stat like crazy.

Marthkus wrote:

To keep things simple I am only looking at CRB material for both classes. When you go outside of that, both classes get neat options. Let's assume for a moment that both of them are equally boosted by non-CRB material.

Anyone disagree? Is the extra DPR worth the flaws the Fighter has at high levels?

The monk has better saves, immunities, and skill-ranks for options out of combat, and is nerfed by his own SR. The fighter has better accuracy and damage, better CMB, and more options in a fight. As both are combat classes, I'd say the fighter definitely is better at the combat. Your assessment was pretty skewed, there, or you aren't playing the same game as many of us.

The problem the monk generally has at this level (no, scratch that, at most levels over 8th) is inability to hit anything. In a party context, you don't want someone who is unable to contribute to the party success, no matter how much they may be immune to or how hard they are to hit. The party can cover the fighter's weaknesses when they show, but it's harder to cover the monk's because they always show.

Plus, how many games actually GET to level 20? Very few of them. So even if the monk is better by level 19, he's got 18 levels of suckage underneath him that he had to endure to get there, and he only gets to enjoy it for one level.

Also, why are you looking at the fighter? It's widely considered to be a weak class (not as weak as monk and rogue, but not up to par of the other combat classes all the same) with limited options other than hitting things. Compare the monk to a paladin or barbarian and you see the real metal of the class, or lack thereof.


Atarlost wrote:
That is entirely contrary to the accepted interpretation (see maneuver master monk for how everyone but you thinks it works) and is yet more proof you're not playing the same game as the rest of us.

You may want to be right before being snotty.

The maneuver master uses the same wording as a normal monks maneuver training and THEN says his CMB takes a penalty.

Their bonus is being able to do ANY manuever with extra attacks, including ones that requires a standard action to use. THEN these special extra maneuvers take an extra penalty that a normal monk would not have.

This is useful for Bullrush, Grapple, and Overrun.


@Dabbler

1)Sword and Board fighters do have more AC. One had +10 and another had +3. No one has posted a two-handed fighter for comparison which makes me think everyone is playing sword and board fighters.

2)Try midigating the monks advantages in defenses with CRB items. (someone did this, but the monk still comes out ahead)

3)My monk is so mobile he doesn't need a range weapon. The fighter cannot say the same.

4)You are talking about a lot of non CRB material, which is against the premise of these builds.

5)Compared to the builds posted, my monk has had a better CMB and CMD.

6)DPR includes to-hit and damage.

7)Every fighter build posted so far has had LESS health than my monk. So you are right, my assumption that the fighter would have more health was wrong.

8)Just because the fighter does higher DPR doesn't make him better at combat than the monk. The CR 20 monsters in the Bestiary are still getting hit reliably by my monk.

Pls post a 20 point buy CRB fighter with 880,000 gold of non-custom items (use PFS rules for average health from a d10; 6) to back up your claims.

In the same facet feel free to post barbar and paladin and ranger builds using the same rules. I won't say my claims of monk vs fighter will hold, but it is an interesting comparison.


1) It probably have to do with how much time consuming is to build a 20 level character.

3) That is not true. TO move an attack could means your monk is surroounded by enemis with the party far away. Also when you move you lose a lot in DPR.

6) And crits.

7) I am not so sure how yourmonk have that much healt, but nevermind.

I will post the Two handed for comparision.


Nicos wrote:

1) It probably have to do with how much time consuming is to build a 20 level character.

3) That is not true. TO move an attack could means your monk is surroounded by enemis with the party far away. Also when you move you lose a lot in DPR.

6) And crits.

7) I am not so sure how yourmonk have that much healt, but nevermind.

I will post the Two handed for comparision.

3) Ok someone create a situation where it would behoove my monk to have a ranged attack like the fighter. The back and forth on this issue has grown circular

6)Yep. All that. Idk why people thought that when I said "DPR" that I meant "ave damage on hit" and not "average damage per round".

7) The math is in the build. (note for this thread d8s average 5 HP and d10s average 6 HP)

Thank you, since most fighters I've seen in play or on the boards are two-handed, I feel that they have been underrepresented in this thread.


Marthkus wrote:
1)Sword and Board fighters do have more AC. One had +10 and another had +3. No one has posted a two-handed fighter for comparison which makes me think everyone is playing sword and board fighters.

Probably because it takes ages to create a 20 level build.

Marthkus wrote:
2)Try mitigating the monks advantages in defenses with CRB items. (someone did this, but the monk still comes out ahead)

Why bother? Offence IS defence. For example:

* If you have a foe with an SLA that will finish the encounter, and your monk has a 75% chance to save and he gets five attempts to use it (on average) before you kill him, and my fighter has a 50% success rate but he only gets two attempts before I kill him, I actually have a better chance of winning and surviving the encounter.

* If your enemy deals out 20% more DPR to you because your AC is lower, but you kill them in 50% of the time, you are still ahead.

Another problem is that there is a party context to take into account, because very few encounters are solo.

Marthkus wrote:
3)My monk is so mobile he doesn't need a range weapon. The fighter cannot say the same.

Ranged attacks mean you can engage from safety, and not just put yourself in the enemy's face with your support far behind you - it still gives you more options, such as forcing the enemy to come to you and not the reverse.

Anyway, how is the monk able to get more mobility than the fighter? Both are probably flying regardless.

Marthkus wrote:
4)You are talking about a lot of non CRB material, which is against the premise of these builds.

The favoured class bonus, yes. I'll grant you. Armour spikes and locked gauntlets are core.

Marthkus wrote:
5)Compared to the builds posted, my monk has had a better CMB and CMD.

With your special unique interpretation on how CMB is calculated, yes, I'm sure they are. Back in the real world, perhaps not, and I doubt anyone posted up a maneuver-based fighter.

Marthkus wrote:
6)DPR includes to-hit and damage.

Yes, and varies with target AC. If you have only calculated for the target AC of CR20 foes, unbuffed, then you haven't got a clear picture. Assume buffs, and look at CR22-24 foes for the boss-fights, and the picture changes drastically.

Marthkus wrote:
7)Every fighter build posted so far has had LESS health than my monk. So you are right, my assumption that the fighter would have more health was wrong.

I can't answer for their builds, but see my comment on "Offence is Defence" above.

Marthkus wrote:
8)Just because the fighter does higher DPR doesn't make him better at combat than the monk. The CR 20 monsters in the Bestiary are still getting hit reliably by my monk.

Hitting != winning.

Marthkus wrote:
Pls post a 20 point buy CRB fighter with 880,000 gold of non-custom items (use PFS rules for average health from a d10; 6) to back up your claims.

I'll see if I can throw something together. Don't expect it soon, I have a life.

Marthkus wrote:
In the same facet feel free to post barbar and paladin and ranger builds using the same rules. I won't say my claims of monk vs fighter will hold, but it is an interesting comparison.

I'll see if I have the time.


Marthkus wrote:


3) That is not true. TO move an attack could means your monk is surroounded by enemis with the party far away. Also when you move you lose a lot in DPR.

3) Ok someone create a situation where it would behoove my monk to have a ranged attack like the fighter. The back and forth on this issue has grown circular

Not to mention taht your enhaced speed do not apply when you are flying, so against flying enemis you are as slow as the fighter.


Figther 20
HUman

=== Stats ===
Str 22 (28),Dex 14 (20),con 16 (22),Int 12,Wis 16 (22), Cha 8
=== Defense ===
AC: 41 (+14 armor,+5 dex, +5 def, +5 nat +1 insight, +1 dodge)
Touch AC: 22
FF AC: 35
Hp: 284 (20d10+160)
CMD: 51
DR: 5/-
Fire resistence 10.
=== Saves ===
Fort: +26
Ref : +19 (plus evasion)
Will: +21 (+26 agains fear)
=== Attacks ===
Speed: 40 ft

Melee
+5 Speed Adamantine Falchion: +35/+35/+30/+25/+20 (2d4+43 15-20/x3)
Ranged
+4 Composite longbow: +33/+27/+23/+18 (1d8+16 20/x3)
Cmb: +31 (+42 to disarm, sunder and trip)

=== Feats===
1. Power attack, Combat reflexes, step up
2. Disruptive
3. Iron will
4. WEAPON FOCUS
5. Dodge
6. Lunge
7. Improved Iron will
8. Improved critical (scimitar)
9. Greater fortitude
10. Spellbreaker
11. Weapon specialization
12. Stand still
13. Toughness
14. Greater weapon specialization
15. Ligthing reflexes
16. Greater weapon focus (Falchion)
17. Blinding critical
18. Staggering critical
19. Critical mastery
20. Stunning critical
=== Skills ===
Perception: +38
Stelath: +30
Sense motive: +25
Knowledge (dunegeneering): +25
Acrobatics: +12
Swim: +13
Climb: +13

=== Special ===
Weapon traning 4 (heavy blades, Bows)
Armor traning 4
Bravery +5
=== Gear ===
+5 Speed Adamantine Falcion (131 K)
+5 fire resistent Shadowed full plate (45 K)
Winged boots (16 K)
Belt of physical perfection (144K)
+4 Composite longbow (37 K)
+5 Cloack of resistance (25 K)
Pale green prism Ion stone (30 K)
+6 Headband of wisdom (36 K)
+5 ring of protection (50 K)
+5 amulet of nat armor (50 K)
Robes of eyes (120 K)
Ring of evasion (25 K)
Dusty rose Ioun stone (5 K)
Manual of gainful excercise +2 (55 K)
Manual of bodily health (27)
Dark blue romboid Ioun stone (10 K)
Manual of Calm refelction +2 (55)
Boots of striding and sprinting (5,5 K)


Nicos wrote:
Marthkus wrote:


3) That is not true. TO move an attack could means your monk is surroounded by enemis with the party far away. Also when you move you lose a lot in DPR.

3) Ok someone create a situation where it would behoove my monk to have a ranged attack like the fighter. The back and forth on this issue has grown circular

Not to mention taht your enhaced speed do not apply when you are flying, so against flying enemis you are as slow as the fighter.

Someone just post a situation.


@Dabbler

Can you try to focus on thing at a time. Mammoth post going point by point are only read in full by the two people arguing.


Equipment suggestion for the fighter types:
+5 Luck Blade (0 wishes) defending Armour Spikes.
+5 to AC, +1 luck to saves and a 1.day reroll.
Costs 86050 gp.


@Nicos

There we go. Even if I replace the falchion with a great sword, the fighter comes out WAY ahead in DPR. The CMD is still less, but my monks CMD is overkill.

Ok so this thread had two goals. Either prove high level monks are better, OR discover a Fighter build that can function at high levels.

Now aside from starting with 15 strength at level 1, that is a very solid build.

Regardless, I would like to hear from other people. Between my monk build and Nicos two-handed fighter build, which one would you rather play with? and which one would you rather play as?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Someone just post a situation.

As you approach the brazen gates of (hell), something stirs besides them. It is the Fenrir/Cerebus/The Hound of Hell. He lunges forth wildly, salivating at the smell of your tender flesh, but is restrained by the mystic chain Gleipnir. Still, to pass beyond the gates, you will have to defeat him...

Yes, you can close and melee with him, but wouldn't you just rather stand 120 feet away and shoot him full of arrows?


Marthkus wrote:
Regardless, I would like to hear from other people. Between my monk build and Nicos two-handed fighter build, which one would you rather play with? and which one would you rather play as?

I'd rather play with and as neither. I'd rather they (or I) make a useful character.

If I literally only had those two choices, I'd pick the Fighter, mainly because neither have pounce, so I'm going to need that bow more than anything else.

I may make an archer fighter, which I think is the most relevant fighter at higher levels. Of course, saying "the most relevant fighter" is like saying, "the best quarterback on the Jets."


Candidly, neither. I'd rather play a Paladin...in that role. Oath of Vengeance. Tiefling.


Havoq wrote:
Candidly, neither. I'd rather play a Paladin...in that role. Oath of Vengeance. Tiefling.

Well, with non core material, the fighter will have an extra attack at full BAB, semi pounce, Inmunity to mind control by evil creatures, will roll twice against all mind affecting an other defenses against magic.


Although It would be iluminating is someone post a CRB only ranger, paladin and barbarian at 20 level to see the diferences.


DrDeth wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:


In all honesty, I've been trying to stay out of these debates. I've come to the conclusion that my games are quite different then what I've seen talked about on the forums. My games (or our games, if you want to be politically correct) rarely go past tenth level, "magic marts" are nonexistent, and "optimizing" is unheard of! (Note: my players do not make "sub-optimal builds" to be "better role players." They make sub-optimal builds because they suck at character building.) So I'm not sure my experience means much...

No, you play how almost everyone plays. Almost no one plays at 20th level. PvP, One on One arena combats and so forth are super rare. My LT PF game is now 11th level. It's true we have a couple rotating parties, but few games get much past low teens.

PVP: Don't care for it. That's not what the system was designed for, and I find it boring. However, after looking through this thread, I haven't seen anyone seriously considering comparing based on pvp, so it sounds like a strawman argument.

20th level play: I'd really like to see where you got your data that showed that "almost no one plays at 20th level". How big was your sample size? What was your margin of error? Sampling method? Is your assertion actually based in any facts or evidence?

Regardless of how often you or anyone else plays at high levels, this thread is explicitly called out as a thread about high level play, so comments about how things work at low level are sort of off topic.

pad300: you win the thread.
Also, in that particular scenario the archer is getting 1-2 extra full attacks in.

Quote:
Regardless, I would like to hear from other people. Between my monk build and Nicos two-handed fighter build, which one would you rather play with? and which one would you rather play as?

Neither, I find full-attacks boring. I'd rather play a character with more options from round to round. That's why a lot of people like Path of War/ToB. It's why MA gives martial characters more in-combat options. It's why most (good) homebrew variants of the fighter and monk have options other than straight attacking. Both of the builds you want us to choose between have no decent options in combat except full attack, full attack, full attack, full attack, ...

And that's boring.


pad300 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Someone just post a situation.

As you approach the brazen gates of (hell), something stirs besides them. It is the Fenrir/Cerebus/The Hound of Hell. He lunges forth wildly, salivating at the smell of your tender flesh, but is restrained by the mystic chain Gleipnir. Still, to pass beyond the gates, you will have to defeat him...

Yes, you can close and melee with him, but wouldn't you just rather stand 120 feet away and shoot him full of arrows?

Caster with Fire Shield or a similar spell up. Alternately, you're up against a creature like an ooze that does damage/other bad things to anyone who touches it.


I could probably outshine the Monk with a well-build Bard, a Bard ...

For which I would play at high level, it would - as most others have said - be neither. I really don't understand monks, they don't really float my boat and fighters are too simple for my tastes.

In case of both I would never attempt a CMB based build, since most of the CMB stuff - if not all - costs precious actions that I could use on spells, item activation or attacks.

On a sidenote: I find it quite suspicious that the posted Fighter builds is only allowed Core Rulebook material and that a Shield is frowned upon by the poster - who clearly loves Monks very much.
I guess that it's because he knows that if we went outside the Core Rulebook, his Monk would be so throughly beaten by the fighter that he wouldn't know up from down.

Oh! And remember that when you grabble that balor that you - the OP - would so easily defeat, you take a pesky 6d6 fire damage per round you hold on. And you take a minor 1d6 fire damage just for hitting him. Maybe I wasn't looking, but I don't remember seeing any fire resistance in your posted build?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rocket Surgeon wrote:

I could probably outshine the Monk with a well-build Bard, a Bard ...

My DM doesn't let me play bards anymore...


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Rocket Surgeon wrote:

I could probably outshine the Monk with a well-build Bard, a Bard ...

My DM doesn't let me play bards anymore...

He is right to, them skinny minstrels be crazy bad ;)

I love Bards, my emphasis was mostly because many posters seem to underestimate them :)


pad300 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Someone just post a situation.

As you approach the brazen gates of (hell), something stirs besides them. It is the Fenrir/Cerebus/The Hound of Hell. He lunges forth wildly, salivating at the smell of your tender flesh, but is restrained by the mystic chain Gleipnir. Still, to pass beyond the gates, you will have to defeat him...

Yes, you can close and melee with him, but wouldn't you just rather stand 120 feet away and shoot him full of arrows?

That situation is a non-encounter. My monk could just chuck rocks at the thing.


Rocket Surgeon wrote:

I could probably outshine the Monk with a well-build Bard, a Bard ...

For which I would play at high level, it would - as most others have said - be neither. I really don't understand monks, they don't really float my boat and fighters are too simple for my tastes.

In case of both I would never attempt a CMB based build, since most of the CMB stuff - if not all - costs precious actions that I could use on spells, item activation or attacks.

On a sidenote: I find it quite suspicious that the posted Fighter builds is only allowed Core Rulebook material and that a Shield is frowned upon by the poster - who clearly loves Monks very much.
I guess that it's because he knows that if we went outside the Core Rulebook, his Monk would be so throughly beaten by the fighter that he wouldn't know up from down.

Oh! And remember that when you grabble that balor that you - the OP - would so easily defeat, you take a pesky 6d6 fire damage per round you hold on. And you take a minor 1d6 fire damage just for hitting him. Maybe I wasn't looking, but I don't remember seeing any fire resistance in your posted build?

Feel free to post that CRB bard.

*No one is grappling the balor. His CMD is to high.

I've stated why I'm keeping everything in core. If we went out of core, I would have to make a monk using archetypes, alternate race features, new equipment, ect... It takes less time to write up a CRB only character and the rules in the CRB has been addressed for the most part by FAQs.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Caster with Fire Shield or a similar spell up. Alternately, you're up against a creature like an ooze that does damage/other bad things to anyone who touches it.

SR can block the effect.

Would your fighter not run up and hit the caster, just to avoid a little bit of damage?

Most of the other bad things oozes do my monk is immune too.


Marthkus wrote:
It takes less time to write up a CRB only character

It takes me a lot longer to do a CRB only character, actually, because every time I go to put something I want down, I have to go double check to see if it's in the CRB or another book, which is a huge pain and the main obstacle to me posting a build at the moment.


mplindustries wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Regardless, I would like to hear from other people. Between my monk build and Nicos two-handed fighter build, which one would you rather play with? and which one would you rather play as?

I'd rather play with and as neither. I'd rather they (or I) make a useful character.

If I literally only had those two choices, I'd pick the Fighter, mainly because neither have pounce, so I'm going to need that bow more than anything else.

I may make an archer fighter, which I think is the most relevant fighter at higher levels. Of course, saying "the most relevant fighter" is like saying, "the best quarterback on the Jets."

Archer fighter wasn't one of the options. You are free to post such a build though.

I would rather play the monk because he can do more than just full attack every round and he has higher defenses.

The only time full-attacking is the best option for him is against high CMD and high Fort monsters.

*Note: PvP could actually be relevant depending on what kind of NPC BBEGs your GM throws at you. Not every enemy is from the Bestiary, some come from the CRB.


mplindustries wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
It takes less time to write up a CRB only character
It takes me a lot longer to do a CRB only character, actually, because every time I go to put something I want down, I have to go double check to see if it's in the CRB or another book, which is a huge pain and the main obstacle to me posting a build at the moment.

You could try looking at the options in the CRB and then making a character.

I don't have the system mastery to look through every books Paizo has every published for pathfinder and make the best monk possible. Even if I did pull that off and made a monk better than the fighter at everything (even DPR) people would complain that the monk takes too much system mastery to make effective.


Marthkus wrote:
I would rather play the monk because he can do more than just full attack every round and he has higher defenses.

I'm honestly not seeing any options but full attacking. Well, other than moving then attacking, which is strictly inferior.

Marthkus wrote:
You could try looking at the options in the CRB and then making a character.

1) I don't own a copy of the CRB and my go to resource, the d20SRD, isn't organized in a way to make that possible.

2) With the exception of magic items, which I don't really use when I GM, I build characters mostly from memory, with just looking up the details on what I want, rather than flipping through the options and choosing from them
3) I find CRB only to be intensely boring

Marthkus wrote:
I don't have the system mastery to look through every books Paizo has every published for pathfinder and make the best monk possible.

Want someone else to try? I could give it a shot. I think you're wrong, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't do my best.


mplindustries wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
I don't have the system mastery to look through every books Paizo has every published for pathfinder and make the best monk possible.
Want someone else to try? I could give it a shot. I think you're wrong, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't do my best.

No not really. I would rather you post CRB other characters like barbars, bards, pally, rangers, fighters ect... Another monk build wouldn't hurt either. But I like mine.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Let me get this straight; this thread is about Monks being better than fighters at high levels, I get that.

You try to prove this by posting your own monk build, of which you are obviously rather fond.

So the first premise to prove this is that the fighter builds can only be made using the Core Rulebook, because you don't want to dig around any other books - even the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic or - more to the point - Ultimate Combat. When called out on this you admit that your system mastery isn't good enough to allow more than the Core Rulebook.

The second premise to prove your superiority seems to be to deny certain ways to use the fighter. We're not allowed to make an archer - which seems broadly agreed to be the most efficient fighter. And using shields are highly frowned upon, since most of the posts you've read about fighters are based around two-handed builds.

When someone else offers to build a monk for you, using all of the relevant books, you decline, saying that you really like your own monk build and that it is the one that this "test" is using.

Now it's looking more and more to me like you're not really here to make an argument for the Monk, but instead to make all of us appreciate YOUR Monk and how amazing he is, because you really like him.

I honestly don't think that there's anything wrong with that. Problem is that your arguments seems to be based around how you want others to build fighters the way you want them to be, so that you will prove your point to us all.

Personally, I don't think that Monks are as bad as the forums make them to be and I've seen some wonderful monks played by people who really understood how to make them shine. What bugs me about these monk love threads is how they seems to deevolve into imotional rants about how amazing monks are and how wrong everyone who doesn't like them are.

Still working on my bard build btw, it's late in my part of the world and I am tired :)

Edit: Sorry if I seem a bit condensending, it's late, I'm tired and I'm not usually known for my high diplomacy skill ;)


Marthkus wrote:

@Dabbler

Can you try to focus on thing at a time. Mammoth post going point by point are only read in full by the two people arguing.

Post your questions/points as individual messages, and I will answer them as such.


Outside core the monk get buffed. The shield and board fighter and the archer get buffed to the poin that he now is a melee range combatant too, the THF fighter remain basically the same.

The paladin and the ranger get buffed and the barbarian get massively buffed to the point that the Invulnerable rager superstitous pouncing come and get me barbarian is probably the strongest martial in the game, probably by far.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I find it amusing that someone who admits to not having a high enough system mastery to use multiple books (including books that have been out for years) to make a single character is telling the people who have enough system mastery to write guides that they're wrong and he's right. Its a funny world.

But really, there's already been multiple fighter builds posted and surprise surprise the important predictions held true, the monk had higher will saves and a few extra options such as skills and a superior ground speed while the fighter had better offense and armor class. Changing the fighter to an archer won't change any of that.

Personally, as a wizard player, I'm fine with someone who wishes to play either class. Boris the Strong and Fair can be a monk just as easily as he can be a fighter.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

CR 16 Ancient Black Dragon.

It has a 200' fly speed and insect plague at will. The monk cannot have a fly speed sufficient to close with the dragon from the spell's max range over the course of its casting time and the spell creates swarms which do swarm damage. Swarm damage can only be prevented by DR and the monk does not have sufficient DR to completely prevent the damage on a high roll. The monk will die 1 or 2 points at a time and there's not a thing he can do about it except surrender or hide indoors. If there is any indoors to hide in. Black dragons are native to swamps and breath acid and caves in swamps tend to be full of water and buildings in swamps tend to be composed of wood or and/or reeds rather than something like stone that can stand up to acid because of the lack of stable footing for stone construction.

The fighter has a bow that outranges long spell range. He cannot kill the dragon in an outdoor encounter without quite a bit of luck because no item gives more than 60' fly speed, but he can drive it off wounded rather than hiding under shelter and waiting for it to get bored.

Any gargantuan dragon with flyby attack (CR 17 minimum among chromatics). A gargantuan dragon has more than 4 times the fly speed of anyone using an item and can trade standard melee attacks using its full BAB and HC>CR against the monk's 3/4 BAB using a crossbow. Many dragons also have vital strike and vital strike is compatible with flyby attack because Paizo hates groundlings.

The fighter is not in great shape, but at least he can use a longbow to make full attacks at full BAB.

If the rest of the party can prevent the dragon from winning with magic the fighter can contribute significantly to victory. The monk can't. If it's a solo encounter the monk dies horribly and the fighter probably gets dominated or something. Black dragons are particularly nasty because they're native to an environment that doesn't have many good places to hide from a flying creature that can spew acid.


Rocket Surgeon wrote:
The second premise to prove your superiority seems to be to deny certain ways to use the fighter. We're not allowed to make an archer - which seems broadly agreed to be the most efficient fighter. And using shields are highly frowned upon, since most of the posts you've read about fighters are based around two-handed builds.

This is a misunderstanding. I said the archer fighter wasn't an option because none had been posted yet.

If you say "I would play an archer cause they are the best fighter" you need to post a build to back up your claim.

I made this monk for this thread, because it occurred to me looking at complaints about the fighter, that a monk suffers from none of those problems AND can have decent AC and immaculate CMD. When I see people dismiss the DPR of the fighter, but then criticize the DPR of the monk for being less than the fighter, I have to sit and scratch my head.


With non core an archer fighter is probably the strongest fighter. But with just core the archer can not tank so it is just DPR.


Atarlost wrote:
If the rest of the party can prevent the dragon from winning with magic the fighter can contribute significantly to victory. The monk can't. If it's a solo encounter the monk dies horribly and the fighter probably gets dominated or something. Black dragons are particularly nasty because they're native to an environment that doesn't have many good places to hide from a flying creature that can spew acid.

In a party the monk can chase the dragon using boots and DD. If the dragon doesn't stop and full attack, it will die from the party or run away.

Solo the monk can GTFO and hide. Neither the monk nor the fighter will be killed by this beast.

If the dragon ever does get close to the monk, he can grapple it. The fighter needs the dragon to be close enough for several full attacks.


Marthkus wrote:
pad300 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Someone just post a situation.

As you approach the brazen gates of (hell), something stirs besides them. It is the Fenrir/Cerebus/The Hound of Hell. He lunges forth wildly, salivating at the smell of your tender flesh, but is restrained by the mystic chain Gleipnir. Still, to pass beyond the gates, you will have to defeat him...

Yes, you can close and melee with him, but wouldn't you just rather stand 120 feet away and shoot him full of arrows?

That situation is a non-encounter. My monk could just chuck rocks at the thing.

It is indeed a non-encounter for someone with effective ranged weapons. A 20th level character without such weapons though - well, DR and Fast Healing/Regeneration say suck it to rock boy...

As for examples of such encounters in actual play - the "Shoggoth in a bowl" encounter in Pathfinder #65, Into the Nightmare Rift...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

OK, here's a maneuvery fighter, 20 point buy, CRB only:

Spoiler:
Big Bad Trippy Fighter
Male Human Fighter 20
LN Medium Humanoid (human)
Init +5; Senses Perception +24
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 41, touch 22, flat-footed 35 (+14 armor, +5 Dex, +5 natural, +5 deflection, +1 dodge) AC 47 with Combat Expertise
hp 284 (20d10+160)
Fort +23, Ref +18, Will +17 (+5 vs. fear)
Defensive Abilities bravery +5, fortification 25%; DR 5/—
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +5 Armor spikes +40/+35/+30/+25 (1d6+20/x2) and
. . +5 Speed Adamantine Guisarme +43/+43/+38/+33/+28 (2d4+31/19-20/x4) or . . +5 Speed Adamantine Guisarme + Power Attack +37/+37/+32/+27/+22 (2d4+49/19-20/x4) (that's 216 damage on a critical hit...ouch!)
and
. . Gauntlet (from Armor) +35/+30/+25/+20 (1d3+15/x2) and
. . Unarmed strike +35/+30/+25/+20 (1d3+15/x2)
Ranged +2 Composite longbow (Str +12) +29/+24/+19/+14 (1d8+16/x3)
Special Attacks weapon training abilities (heavy blades +1, bows +2, close +3, pole arms +4)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 34, Dex 20, Con 22, Int 13, Wis 18, Cha 8
Base Atk +20; CMB +32 (+36 Disarming, +34 Grappling, +36 Sundering, +36 Tripping) (Using guisarm, +47 Disarming, +47 Sundering, +47 Tripping); CMD 54 (56 vs. Disarm, 56 vs. Grapple, 56 vs. Sunder, 56 vs. Trip) (+6 CMD using Combat Expertise)
Feats Combat Expertise +/-6, Combat Reflexes (6 AoO/round), Dodge, Greater Disarm, Greater Sunder, Greater Trip, Greater Weapon Focus (Guisarme), Greater Weapon Specialization (Guisarme), Improved Critical (Guisarme), Improved Disarm, Improved Grapple, Improved Iron Will (1/day), Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Improved Unarmed Strike, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Lunge, Power Attack -6/+12, Toughness, Weapon Focus (Guisarme), Weapon Specialization (Guisarme)
Skills Acrobatics +4, Climb +31, Escape Artist +4, Fly +4, Handle Animal +4, Intimidate +15, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +10, Knowledge (engineering) +10, Perception +24, Ride +10, Stealth +4, Survival +13, Swim +21
Languages Common, Draconic
SQ ghost touch, weapon mastery (guisarme)
Other Gear +5 Armor spikes (magical), Fortification (light), , +2 Composite longbow (Str +12), +5 Speed Adamantine Guisarme, Amulet of natural armor +5, Belt of physical perfection +6, Cloak of resistance +5, Headband of inspired wisdom +6, Ioun stone (dusty rose prism), Manual of bodily health +2, Manual of gainful exercise +5, Manual of quickness of action +2, Ring of evasion, Ring of protection +5, Winged boots (3/day), 789 PP, 1 GP
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Improved Iron Will (1/day) - 0/1
Winged boots (3/day) - 0/3
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Bravery +5 (Ex) +5 to Will save vs. Fear
Combat Expertise +/-6 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Combat Reflexes (6 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Damage Reduction (5/-) You have Damage Reduction against all attacks.
Fortification 25% You have a chance to negate critical hits on attacks.
Ghost touch Enhancement and armor bonus count against incorporeal creatures.
Greater Disarm When disarming a foe, their weapon lands 15 ft away in a random direction.
Greater Sunder When destroying an item, extra damage is transferred to the wielder.
Greater Trip Foes you trip provoke AoO when they are knocked prone.
Improved Disarm You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when disarming.
Improved Grapple You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when grappling a foe.
Improved Iron Will (1/day) Can re-roll a Will save, but must take the second result.
Improved Sunder You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when sundering.
Improved Trip You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when tripping.
Improved Unarmed Strike Unarmed strikes don't cause attacks of opportunity, and can be lethal.
Lunge Can increase reach by 5 ft, but take -2 to AC for 1 rd.
Power Attack -6/+12 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Ring of evasion No damage if you succeed on a Reflex save for half damage.
Weapon Mastery (Guisarme) (Ex) Chosen weapon has an improved critical multiplier, always confirms criticals, and cannot be disarmed.
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +1 (Ex) +1 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Training (Bows) +2 (Ex) +2 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Bows
Weapon Training (Close) +3 (Ex) +3 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Close-in weapons
Weapon Training (Pole Arms) +4 (Ex) +4 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Pole Arms
Winged boots (3/day) Fly as spell for up to 5 minutes. +4 to fly checks.

As you can see he matches Marthkus' monk's CMD if he uses Combat Expertise, and he also matches his AC without it. Attack bonus is WAY higher, and his CMB when using his guisarm is likewise a lot better (and he has reach). Both can fly. The monk has considerably better Will and Reflex saves, but the fighter's Improved Iron Will gives him a second chance if he fails one, and his hit points can soak a lot of damage (he has more than the monk there, too). Given his damage output, anything attacking his mind isn't likely to get more than one attempt. He has a decent ranged option, although it's not stellar he has the cash to invest in a double-handful of +1 bane arrows for the things he's likely to need them against.

On the whole, way better offensively, with easily equal mundane defences, and worse Will and Reflex saves.


Dabbler wrote:
On the whole, way better offensively, with easily equal mundane defences, and worse Will and Reflex saves.

Yep. The question is whether or not the extra DPR is worth the worse will save and other magical defenses.

My monk is still more mobile. Being able to DD and move 90ft per round is nice. The only time the fighter and the monk can have equal movement is if the fight requires flying, but not so much flying that DD would be useful.

*Also my monk has a ring of regeneration instead of a ring of evasion. Obviously not a huge deal, but worth mentioning.

Personally I would rather have better defenses against the things that can one-shot me, than being able to kill things faster.


Marthkus wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
If the rest of the party can prevent the dragon from winning with magic the fighter can contribute significantly to victory. The monk can't. If it's a solo encounter the monk dies horribly and the fighter probably gets dominated or something. Black dragons are particularly nasty because they're native to an environment that doesn't have many good places to hide from a flying creature that can spew acid.

In a party the monk can chase the dragon using boots and DD. If the dragon doesn't stop and full attack, it will die from the party or run away.

Solo the monk can GTFO and hide. Neither the monk nor the fighter will be killed by this beast.

If the dragon ever does get close to the monk, he can grapple it. The fighter needs the dragon to be close enough for several full attacks.

The monk cannot chase the dragon productively because Dimension Door, and therefore Abundant Step, end your turn. You can appear next to it and accomplish nothing or you can appear ahead of it and cause it to change direction and ultimately accomplish nothing.

You cannot reliably grapple the dragon. The weakest gargantuan dragon has CMD 48. You have miscalculated your CMB by adding your weapon enhancement to maneuvers other than trip, disarm, and sunder. Your real grapple CMB is 32. That's a 1 in 4 chance of grappling. The closer to par CR 19 Ancient Red and Great Black Wyrm have CMD 52 and can only be grappled on a natural 20. But it doesn't actually matter because Abundant Step acts like Dimension Door and therefore ends your turn.

The monk cannot, as you say, GTFO except possibly from the ancient red because he has a move speed of 90' while they have a fly speed of 250' and all except the red also have dimension door as a spell known by default and cast spontaneously. Unless the monk is in an environment with breath-proof cover he cannot escape without help should a dragon choose to pursue him. Empty Body can only produce 450' of distance, which will be inadequate unless there are caverns or structures within that range to phase into. There will not be structures in a dragon's territory and at least one type of dragon is native to an environment in which there won't be caves either.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, I scanned the title of this thread way to fast & did a double take. I originally read it as, "Monks are Better than Fighters in HIGH HEELS." I was like, WTF?!?!?!


Cue up the high heels as a weapon jokes.


Atarlost wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
If the rest of the party can prevent the dragon from winning with magic the fighter can contribute significantly to victory. The monk can't. If it's a solo encounter the monk dies horribly and the fighter probably gets dominated or something. Black dragons are particularly nasty because they're native to an environment that doesn't have many good places to hide from a flying creature that can spew acid.

In a party the monk can chase the dragon using boots and DD. If the dragon doesn't stop and full attack, it will die from the party or run away.

Solo the monk can GTFO and hide. Neither the monk nor the fighter will be killed by this beast.

If the dragon ever does get close to the monk, he can grapple it. The fighter needs the dragon to be close enough for several full attacks.

You have miscalculated your CMB by adding your weapon enhancement to maneuvers other than trip, disarm, and sunder.

Wrong. Tell me how I would grapple without using my body?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Dabbler

I'm not sure you love monks the way you say you do.


Atarlost wrote:
The monk cannot, as you say, GTFO except possibly from the ancient red because he has a move speed of 90' while they have a fly speed of 250' and all except the red also have dimension door as a spell known by default and cast spontaneously. Unless the monk is in an environment with breath-proof cover he cannot escape without help should a dragon choose to pursue him. Empty Body can only produce 450' of distance, which will be inadequate unless there are caverns or structures within that range to phase into. There will not be structures in a dragon's territory and at least one type of dragon is native to an environment in which there won't be caves either.

Monk turns Ethereal. As a move action in place of his standard action.

Monk uses DD. As a move action.

Stealth check.

Good luck finding my monk.


Quote:
Marthkus wrote:
You have miscalculated your CMB by adding your weapon enhancement to maneuvers other than trip, disarm, and sunder.
Wrong. Tell me how I would grapple without using my body?

The same way that weapon focus (unarmed) will not add to your grapple CMB. Atarlost is right here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Wrong. Tell me how I would grapple without using my body?

Doesn't matter if you use your body, you're not using your Unarmed Strike.

Havoq wrote:
Cue up the high heels as a weapon jokes.

You mean this thread here?

101 to 150 of 976 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Monks are Better than Fighters at high levels. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.