The most powerful Monk?


Advice

301 to 350 of 581 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

There's always the Adopted Racial trait ;)


And the Crane style feat tree works great with stunning fist and a Hungry Ghost's Punishing Kick. "Finally, I get within melee range of you, and have a full attack. I swing my sword..." I roll some dice, "Deflected, and now I stun you as an AoO." "I stop swinging my sword :("

Or, instead of stun, I kick you backwards 5 ft. and knock you prone. Kinda hard to finish your full attack, then.

And I prefer the strength build over dex. In the end, dex is awesome, but early game, a high strength + a lot of shuriken (especially with the Barbarian Hurler's increased range) = decent damage from a distance.

Dark Archive

On paper a pure fighter might have a better shot, overall, against a balor. However, in reality and actual gameplay we know this isn't true. The monk has more and better skills, benefits more from increased wealth/stats (one of the few cases where being mad helps), has more options than a fighter in any given combat or non-combat situation, can heal, etc, etc, etc. the list is long and scrolls.

But yes, in an arena, on a flat surface surrounded by impossibly high walls of force and a ceiling of force, sure. The fighter wins. And since we are talking about pure dpr then sure the fighter has an easier time of winning. Walk up to monster, roll d20,
Win.

Monks can do the same. They roll more and spend. More time rolling d20's but they also are not limited to that as an offensive option. They also have more option for defense than a fighter. But as has been stated, pure mechanical strength and especially dpr capability, a fighter will come out ahead and largely due to the situations where both are atuck taking single attacks.

I am not sure where 3-4 atks at +18 don't compete with one atk at +30 and another at +15, though. I think that on a full attack the monk is doing just fine.

Edit-current crane style is lame IMO. Making it apply after an atk role and also counting as a deflection for crane relatiation would be acceptable.


Mechanical Pear wrote:

And the Crane style feat tree works great with stunning fist and a Hungry Ghost's Punishing Kick. "Finally, I get within melee range of you, and have a full attack. I swing my sword..." I roll some dice, "Deflected, and now I stun you as an AoO." "I stop swinging my sword :("

Or, instead of stun, I kick you backwards 5 ft. and knock you prone. Kinda hard to finish your full attack, then.

And I prefer the strength build over dex. In the end, dex is awesome, but early game, a high strength + a lot of shuriken (especially with the Barbarian Hurler's increased range) = decent damage from a distance.

crane style nerf kills that idea, unless you're doing a total defense action.


I was under the impression that there was another errata, after the one that makes it suck. One that lets Crane Riposte trigger if the Crane Winged attack misses. But let me double check myself.


Quote:

Crane Riposte: With the changes made to Crane Wing, how does Crane Riposte work?

While the feat still reduced your penalty when fighting defensively, there is a change to the text the follows.

Update: Page 93, in the Crane Riposte feat, in the benefits paragraph, change the second sentence to read as follows: Whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses. In addition, when you deflect an attack using Crane Wing while taking the total defense action, you may make an attack of opportunity against that opponent (even though you could not normally do so while taking the total defense action).

—Pathfinder Design Team, 01/27/14

Link.


I started scrapping the entire build when the whole Crane Style erratas started pissing everyone off. But this saved it, for me.


Dark Immortal wrote:
On paper a pure fighter might have a better shot, overall, against a balor. However, in reality and actual gameplay we know this isn't true.

No really, it is true.

Dark Immortal wrote:
The monk has more and better skills,

How do they help, exactly? I can see Acrobatics being used to avoid AoO's, and maybe stealth to sneak around IF there is cover. But skills are largely non-combat options, not combat options.

Dark Immortal wrote:
benefits more from increased wealth/stats (one of the few cases where being mad helps),

Deficits from his weapon costing twice as much...extra stat-boosters because he IS MAD...Actually the monk is MORE equipment-dependent than any other class. He may be spending on different things, but he's still spending.

Dark Immortal wrote:
has more options than a fighter in any given combat or non-combat situation,

Non-combat, yes, but a monk is not going to Diplomacy his way around a balor and is not sufficiently skilled enough to get by with skills alone - he's a not a skills monkey, he's a combat class. In combat, the fighter has: run up and hit it, or shoot is at range. The monk has run up and hit it, and maybe do one or two different things if you hit it and if you can do damage. In fact most of the monk's combat options are available to the fighter, should he choose to take them.

Dark Immortal wrote:
can heal,

Wholeness of body is no better than drinking a potion, and unless you are a monk archetype with the ability to reclaim ki then drinking the potion costs you less resources.

Dark Immortal wrote:
etc, etc, etc. the list is long and scrolls.

And as easily dismissed, I'm afraid.

Dark Immortal wrote:

But yes, in an arena, on a flat surface surrounded by impossibly high walls of force and a ceiling of force, sure. The fighter wins. And since we are talking about pure dpr then sure the fighter has an easier time of winning. Walk up to monster, roll d20,

Win.

Indeed not, but equally you are in a party of fellow adventurers who are relying on the combat classes to protect them while they do their thing. That means taking down the enemy fast and effectively.

Dark Immortal wrote:
Monks can do the same. They roll more and spend. More time rolling d20's but they also are not limited to that as an offensive option.

They have attack (rolling d20's), maneuvers (rolling d20's), and...well that's actually about it for most monks. Unless they suddenly became 2/3 of full spell-casters?

Also, while the monk is taking time to kill the threat, the threat can be killing the monk's friends. What if the balor has been given the mission of killing the party wizard? He pops out and attacks just that one person mercilessly, you have to stop him ASAP. Every round the enemy is alive is a round it has to hurt everyone else. He doesn't care if you "kill" him because then he just goes back to his home plane, he just cares about doing what he wants to do before that happens.

Dark Immortal wrote:
They also have more option for defense than a fighter.

They have better defences, but these are not exactly options per se. The fighter can have defences adequate to his role, and that's enough.

Dark Immortal wrote:
But as has been stated, pure mechanical strength and especially dpr capability, a fighter will come out ahead and largely due to the situations where both are stuck taking single attacks.

Yes he will, and all fights basically come down to "be hit and hit back" - that's what combat is all about, and monks are a combat class. I'm not saying they have to be as good as the fighter, but I would argue they need to be on the same playing field.

Dark Immortal wrote:
I am not sure where 3-4 atks at +18 don't compete with one atk at +30 and another at +15, though. I think that on a full attack the monk is doing just fine.

Why would you get one attack at +30 and another at +15? If your first attack is at +30 then your second is usually at +25. If you are power-attacking with Furious Focus, it might be +30 and +19 at level 20, but I get the feeling that these bonuses are not at that level.

It all depends what AC you are trying to hit: mooks, with AC20, yes your monk is going to have a field day with four attacks...and the fighter will Great Cleave as many with ease. But yes, you are as good as the fighter at fighting mooks. Huzzah!

Against the boss with AC35, you don't stand a prayer. You only have a 20% chance of scoring a hit with an attack for an 80% chance of a hit in a full round of attacks, while the fighter has virtually that with his first attack - he's going to get on average at least one hit a turn, and will do more damage per hit. That's what makes the big difference - everyone can destroy mooks. Most can take on a CR-equivelant. Where the crunch comes is the BBEG fight, and if you cannot hit and damage the target then, you may as well sit it out.

That's why the monk needs a boost to his accuracy: It's reduced by MAD, by lack of enhancement, and by his lower BAB, and he has no way of bumping it up where every other core combat class has bonuses to hit on top of SAD, full BAB, and full enhancement.


Dabbler, I'm not sure I understand you correctly.

Quote:
That's why the monk needs a boost to his accuracy: It's reduced by MAD

The build I posted has the monk boasted a 30 strength at 20th level.

Quote:
...by lack of enhancement...

This monk has an enhanced katana, and there are options to enhance unarmed. AoMF, Clockwork Prostheses, Permanent Magic Fang....

Quote:
...and by his lower BAB...

Monk's flurry. When they do so, they do it at full bab, -2.

Quote:
...and he has no way of bumping it up where every other core combat class has bonuses to hit on top of SAD, full BAB, and full enhancement.

You're referring to weapon training, being the bonuses to hit on top of those things? That's, what? another 4 points to hit?

Fighters are good. In their own way. I fail to see how monks aren't as well.

Not to further turn this into a "monk's suck" thread, but yeah.


The fighter and monk VS Balor had been done before.

The fighter kills it faster, the monk takes about two or three times as many turns; that is, if either doesn't fail a will save/the Balor doesn't summon a flank buddy.

Silver Crusade

Why don't we look at a pit fiend?


Also, in terms of items, the monk keeps up pretty well, considering the fighter is only able to up his AC with a Dex/Str belt when the monk doesnt care as much about as wis and gets Monk AC and robe that ups damage and AC.

Fighter has Mwk weapons and +1 before the monk, but the monk is only ever -1 enhance to the fighter, will have better saves (less spent on cloak) evasion, Barkskin.

Monk is only ever behind by 1 level in terms of enhancement except at 13 where it is cheeper to get a +6 str belt than the +4 AoMF and str gives more damage for dragon style.

AC, monk also does well in terms of enhancement, remaining within +1 AC and this does not include Monk AC and Wis bonuses, which he can afford and needs (fighter has armor bonus from breast/fullplate so it's a wash)

I'll post the numbers in a bit, but Monk is looking fairly comparable till 15.
At 15 fighter gets to double PA damage, monk gets 2 new style-feats which he can use at Lv16, but 7th lv spells so who cares anymore amiright?


waiph wrote:

Also, in terms of items, the monk keeps up pretty well, considering the fighter is only able to up his AC with a Dex/Str belt when the monk doesnt care as much about as wis and gets Monk AC and robe that ups damage and AC.

Fighter has Mwk weapons and +1 before the monk, but the monk is only ever -1 enhance to the fighter, will have better saves (less spent on cloak) evasion, Barkskin.

Monk is only ever behind by 1 level in terms of enhancement except at 13 where it is cheeper to get a +6 str belt than the +4 AoMF and str gives more damage for dragon style.

AC, monk also does well in terms of enhancement, remaining within +1 AC and this does not include Monk AC and Wis bonuses, which he can afford and needs (fighter has armor bonus from breast/fullplate so it's a wash)

I'll post the numbers in a bit, but Monk is looking fairly comparable till 15.
At 15 fighter gets to double PA damage, monk gets 2 new style-feats which he can use at Lv16, but 7th lv spells so who cares anymore amiright?

How is the Monk only -1 enhance behind the fighter when enhancement bonuses for an AoMF cost twice as much as that of the fighter? Sure, the Monk may not be spending money on normal armor, but he's still spending money buying bracers, or a ring, or stat boosters.

With the exception of the initial armor cost, the price for enhancement on armor and bracers is exactly the same, except the fact that armor ultimately gives you a higher bonus. +5 full plate costs roughly 27,000 gp and gives you a net bonus of +14 AC increase, while for roughly the same price, the Monk can only get a +5 bracer. Even if he caps out at +8, he's still missing +6 from his AC.

I now, ultimately, the Monk will probably outclass the 2-hand fighter in terms of AC, but the 2-hand fighter needs significantly less in gear to function. For him, he needs his Ring of Protection, his Amulet of armor, Magic sword, magic armor, Strength booster, and cloak of resistance. For the Monk, it varies a little, but not much; he needs Str and Dex booster (or just Dex if Finesse), Wis booster, AoMF (and consequently, not an Amulet of armor), Ring, Robe, Cloak, and Bracers. The AoMF and Bracers all cost significantly more than the Fighters Sword and Armor do, which lets the Fighter spend more money elsewhere, so shore up weak points, or gather extras like Gloves of Dueling, Boots of Speed, Jingasa, an Ioun Stone, Ring of inner fortitude and other helpful items. With just the difference in cost between the sword, armor, AoMF and bracers, the Fighter has an extra 39,000 gp to toss around and that's before the extra stat boosters or the Monks Robe.

All told, a Fighter should be more like +2 ahead on enhancement for his weapon and/or his armor, and acquiring his stat boosters, save boosters and stuff before the Monk.


Not to mention that ultimately the Fighter can get a +10 enhancement on his weapon whereas the monk is stuck at +5. The monk got a little bit of love with respect to DR, but the fighter will still be ahead of the monk in terms of enhancement availability.


I'm going really sparce on other gear, and haven't had time to factor in any non+enhancement bonuses, so it's not the full picture yet.

Following that the Fighter's weapon and Monk's AoMF are allowed to take between 1/4th to 1/2 their total wealth, and then filling in armor up to 1/4th of their wealth and accounting for Gloves of dueling and Monk robes at 10th, the monk is looking like he's only back +1 on his enhancement. When the fighter can afford his +4, the monk can get a +3 (monk may be 2 behind when fighter gets +5 but only for part of a level depending on wether the monk goes for Enhance or Str.)

Silver Crusade

Monk still has better chance vs Baylor then a semi unprepared wizard.


remember folks, the AoMF isnt *required* anymore since the clockwork prosthesis is out--it costs regular to enchant, and can go up to +10 like any other weapon. main issue is that it's 6k, meaning that you'll have to wait for quite a few levels to get one.

if youre stuck using an AoMF because you DM is a terrible person, for higher levels the monk's robe isnt terribly useful anymore--it's effects cap at effective monk level 20, you can wear a bodywrap of mighty strikes (yes, yes, heresy i know) to add more effects (like, say, holy and courageous) to 4 attacks, generally the first four since they're more likely to hit.

keep the AoMF at a flat +5 enhancement, and use the bodywraps for auxiliary effects.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
AndIMustMask wrote:

remember folks, the AoMF isnt *required* anymore since the clockwork prosthesis is out--it costs regular to enchant, and can go up to +10 like any other weapon. main issue is that it's 6k, meaning that you'll have to wait for quite a few levels to get one.

if youre stuck using an AoMF because you DM is a terrible person, for higher levels the monk's robe isnt terribly useful anymore--it's effects cap at effective monk level 20, you can wear a bodywrap of mighty strikes (yes, yes, heresy i know) to add more effects (like, say, holy and courageous) to 4 attacks, generally the first four since they're more likely to hit.

keep the AoMF at a flat +5 enhancement, and use the bodywraps for auxiliary effects.

Unless

1) You didn't want to play robocop and cut off all your limbs to make your monk work

OR

2) You know that in a month or two they're going to make it so that prosthetics don't count for unarmed strikes because if they were going to nerf Brass Knuckles into oblivion why not do the same to fake arms?

Shadow Lodge

Mechanical Pear wrote:

The build I posted has the monk boasted a 30 strength at 20th level.

...

This monk has an enhanced katana, and there are options to enhance unarmed. AoMF, Clockwork Prostheses, Permanent Magic Fang....

...

Monk's flurry. When they do so, they do it at full bab, -2.

...

You're referring to weapon training, being the bonuses to hit on top of those things? That's, what? another 4 points to hit?

Fighters are good. In their own way. I fail to see how monks aren't as well.

Not to further turn this into a "monk's suck" thread, but yeah.

So, you posted a level 20 build with a high strength, yet most campaigns don't reach 20 anyway. The build is only 3/4 monk, requires you be a specific race or take a specific trait, requires you worship a specific god, and has a bunch of feats you need to take. It is a cool build, but it seems incredibly min-maxed, and is difficult to pull off.

A monk with a katana I doubt is what most people think when they think of a monk, nor is robo-cop.

So that leaves paying the cost for essentially 2 magic weapons, or paying for a spell which means one good Dispel Magic, and you are a sad panda.

Flurry is only when you don't move more than 5ft, even though the monk is advertised as a mobile class, and even then they are behind.

Fighter Weapon Training may seem boring, but it is a 4 attack and damage, so it is essentially [using the +1attack=+2damage ratio], a +12 damage. +12 across 4 attacks that stacks with everything is nothing to laugh at.

And fighter is considered one of the worst classes along with the monk, so lets use a more commonly compared class like Barbarian. You get massive attack bonuses you can increase while raging, you can get pounce, and you get decent will and fort saves to back it up. And can use it more reliably than flurry.

Or look at Paladin, you get your charisma to attack, AC, saves, and with a feat, Initiative, along with your level [or double your level] to damage, and can cast spells, self-heal, and party face. Yeah, it is mediocre against non-evil enemies, but you still get full BAB and high strength on top, all of the time.

I agree that monks are fun, and in fact, they are one of my favorite classes, but they still are mechanically weaker, if you look at the numbers and try to match the theme.

Scarab Sages

Yeah, this isn't shadowrun and monks aren't street samurai. Monks aren't even Ash. We shouldn't us have to rely on clockwork prosthesis to not suck.


ArmouredMonk13 wrote:
Mechanical Pear wrote:

The build I posted has the monk boasted a 30 strength at 20th level.

...

This monk has an enhanced katana, and there are options to enhance unarmed. AoMF, Clockwork Prostheses, Permanent Magic Fang....

...

Monk's flurry. When they do so, they do it at full bab, -2.

...

You're referring to weapon training, being the bonuses to hit on top of those things? That's, what? another 4 points to hit?

Fighters are good. In their own way. I fail to see how monks aren't as well.

Not to further turn this into a "monk's suck" thread, but yeah.

So, you posted a level 20 build with a high strength, yet most campaigns don't reach 20 anyway. The build is only 3/4 monk, requires you be a specific race or take a specific trait, requires you worship a specific god, and has a bunch of feats you need to take. It is a cool build, but it seems incredibly min-maxed, and is difficult to pull off.

A monk with a katana I doubt is what most people think when they think of a monk, nor is robo-cop.

So that leaves paying the cost for essentially 2 magic weapons, or paying for a spell which means one good Dispel Magic, and you are a sad panda.

Flurry is only when you don't move more than 5ft, even though the monk is advertised as a mobile class, and even then they are behind.

Fighter Weapon Training may seem boring, but it is a 4 attack and damage, so it is essentially [using the +1attack=+2damage ratio], a +12 damage. +12 across 4 attacks that stacks with everything is nothing to laugh at.

And fighter is considered one of the worst classes along with the monk, so lets use a more commonly compared class like Barbarian. You get massive attack bonuses you can increase while raging, you can get pounce, and you get decent will and fort saves to back it up. And can use it more reliably than flurry.

Or look at Paladin, you get your charisma to attack, AC, saves, and with a feat, Initiative, along with your level [or double your level] to damage, and can cast spells,...

Paladins aren't mediocre against evil enemies, just not as good. They still sport most of the paladins' defenses, like Cha to saves, or self-healing, plus they can use Weapon Bond to augment their weapon if they chose it. It's simply Smite that doesn't work against non-evil opponents.

I wouldn't put Fighter and Monk in the same category at all. As far as I can tell, the primary complaints about the Fighter isn't fighting, it's his non-combat options. A Fighter is still a strong martial character, it's just that Barbarians, Rangers and Paladins are simply better.

The Fighter class does exactly what his class is supposed to, it fights and it fights well. The Monk, however, struggles to do his job at all. I think the preferred comparison is a Monk to that of a non-favored enemy Ranger because they, kind of resemble each other in some ways. Both can TWF, both have evasion, both have skills, both are kind of 'lightly armored warriors' and are thematically supposed to be capable of being 'lone wolves'. The difference is Monks have a hard time doing any of the above (except the lightly armored part).

The Monk should be equal to that of a Ranger when he's not fighting a favored enemy.

Pet Peeve: It kind of bugs me that the Ranger is full BAB, d10 HD, 4th level spell class that also gets 6 skills per level while the Monk is none of the above, and gets 4 skill points.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:

Paladins aren't mediocre against evil enemies, just not as good. They still sport most of the paladins' defenses, like Cha to saves, or self-healing, plus they can use Weapon Bond to augment their weapon if they chose it. It's simply Smite that doesn't work against non-evil opponents.

I wouldn't put Fighter and Monk in the same category at all. As far as I can tell, the primary complaints about the Fighter isn't fighting, it's his non-combat options. A Fighter is still a strong martial character, it's just that Barbarians, Rangers and Paladins are simply better.

The Fighter class does exactly what his class is supposed to, it fights and it fights well. The Monk, however, struggles to do his job at all. I think the preferred comparison is a Monk to that of a non-favored enemy Ranger because they, kind of resemble each other in some ways. Both can TWF, both have evasion, both have skills, both are kind of 'lightly armored warriors' and are thematically supposed to be capable of being 'lone wolves'. The difference is Monks have a hard time doing any of the above (except the lightly armored part).

The Monk should be equal to that of a Ranger when he's not fighting a favored enemy.

Pet Peeve: It kind of bugs me that the Ranger is full BAB, d10 HD, 4th level spell class that also gets 6 skills per level while the Monk is none of the above, and gets 4 skill points.

A good point on paladins, I probably should have said something more like they are on-par v. evil enemies. But a Ranger not fighting his favored class is still better than a monk, since he can still use archery while still looking like a ranger [effectively pouncing], or can flank with his animal companion in melee for a +2 to eliminate the TWF penalty, or just get a +2 for the other styles. And they get flank effectively as a class feature. Still, I agree that Rangers shouldn't get all that they do. For fighters, I was just saying that looking on the forums, fighter, monk and rogue are the 3 most complained about classes, other than maybe paladins [but only due to Code of Conduct]. They are still a neat class, and a strong one.


That build is one of many that is mostly monk, and is effective. While I agree most barbarian and paladin builds are more effective, I was arguing this monk and a fighter. Granted, he's only 3/4s monk, but how many fighter builds dip, you know? I could take out keen scent and extra rage, and drop the levels of fighter. And even then, I've made several variations of this build...champion of irori hungry ghost monk can be pretty brutal...

I may not be coherent, I'm sick as a dog. I apologize.

I do think we need better options than clockwork limbs, though. I like the flavor for my monk, but we can't have all monks with a tragic accident story, or whatever. And to be perfectly honest, a good (non-pfs) dm would probably allow you to change the flavor, but keep all the mechanics. Implanted ioun/soul stones/whatever in that hand.

Edited to add: and more clarification on your assumption that this build has to be so specific: most hungry ghost monks never dip cleric, they just use a temple sword. Others still dip cleric,, but go dex-based and use a scimitar. The barbarian level dips help mechanics, but not enough to stop you from using the same build without them (which now frees up that trait, alignment, race, and some feat selections). Mostly, what got me wanting some barbarian levels anyway was the flavor of going into an uber zen state.


ArmouredMonk13 wrote:
A good point on paladins, I probably should have said something more like they are on-par v. evil enemies. But a Ranger not fighting his favored class is still better than a monk, since he can still use archery while still looking like a ranger [effectively pouncing], or can flank with his animal companion in melee for a +2 to eliminate the TWF penalty, or just get a +2 for the other styles. And they get flank effectively as a class feature. Still, I agree that Rangers shouldn't get all that they do. For fighters, I was just saying that looking on the forums, fighter, monk and rogue are the 3 most complained about classes, other than maybe paladins [but only due to Code of Conduct]. They are still a neat class, and a strong one.

Eh, the biggest complaint I've ever seen about Fighters is that they lack non-combat options. I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone complain about Fighters not being good at fighting, beyond the fact they are susceptible to will saves.


Mechanical Pear wrote:

Dabbler, I'm not sure I understand you correctly.

Quote:
That's why the monk needs a boost to his accuracy: It's reduced by MAD
The build I posted has the monk boasted a 30 strength at 20th level.

At 20th level a standard fighter/barbarian/paladin melee build has 34-36 strength if the player building them has any level of optimisation skill. So you are already 2 behind to hit, courtesy of MAD.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Quote:
...by lack of enhancement...
This monk has an enhanced katana, and there are options to enhance unarmed. AoMF, Clockwork Prostheses, Permanent Magic Fang....

Yes, and monks are the iconic unarmed class. Everything about the monk screams "I am made to be an unarmed killing machine"...As for the Magic Fang, you either have to have a druid or ranger constantly acting as your buff-monkey, or else get it Permanent and pray with all your might that you don't run into an enemy with greater dispel.

So my point remains, the best way to be a monk is to not be a classic monk. Yet people want to play monks to be Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan, not a weapons master or robocop.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Quote:
...and by his lower BAB...
Monk's flurry. When they do so, they do it at full bab, -2.

Congratulations, you are now 4 points behind the fighter to hit, because he isn't locked into one combat style - and that style being the weakest around.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Quote:
...and he has no way of bumping it up where every other core combat class has bonuses to hit on top of SAD, full BAB, and full enhancement.
You're referring to weapon training, being the bonuses to hit on top of those things? That's, what? another 4 points to hit?

Four points to hit and damage, plus another two from dueling gloves, plus another one to hit from Greater Weapon Specialisation, takes you to 7. Your super monk is now 11 points to hit behind the fighter. Anything he hits 60% of the time, you hit 5% of the time. He can make just one attack with better odds of getting a hit on that target than your entire flurry of blows while hasted and burning ki for an extra attack does for a whole round.

And you don't see how this is a problem for a combat class whose main offensive feature is to make melee attacks?

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Fighters are good. In their own way. I fail to see how monks aren't as well.

Monks are supposed to be good at combat and as we have just demonstrated compared to the fighter they are not, not by a very long way. If you cannot hit it, you can't do a lot to it.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Not to further turn this into a "monk's suck" thread, but yeah.

Well sorry to bring on a reality check, but it's a bit like trying to start a thread labelled "Best Melee sorcerer!" - you will get a lot of people pointing out that actually sorcerers are not mechanically and intrinsically very good at melee. Make a thread about "strongest monk" and it will be pointed out that in the grand scheme of things, monks are not actually that strong.

Seriously, you want your katana-weilding "monk" to be any good? Go fighter (weapon master) 3/monk (sohei) 17 and you will end up flurrying with that katana with three levels of weapon training. You can wear dueling gloves and be only -6 to hit behind the fighter (-4 if you boost strength to his level) but have a lot more attacks, which just about evens out. Or better, be an elf and use an elven curve blade, dump strength for dex (use Weapon Finesse and an Agile weapon), and you will retain a killer AC and be a little less MAD.

rorek55 wrote:
Monk still has better chance vs Baylor then a semi unprepared wizard.

Indeed. That's why the balor picks on the semi-unprepared wizard and it's the combat class's job to stop him before he kills the wizard.


Okay, so, let's focus on my "robocop" monk (because using magical items in a fantasy setting is just silly, I agree), and not the vanilla sucky monk you envision.

By looking at my build, you'll see I only have a +2 Inherant bonus to Strength. At level 20, there's nothing stopping him from making that +4, I just didn't finish the item buying before I stopped working on him. He starts with a 17 strength, puts every level bonus into strength, and has a +6 strength belt. So now, I'm actually, only 3 points of strength behind your fighter's.

And then we continue looking at my build, and see that he rages.

Your fighter isn't as strong as my monk :(

Yes, he gets -2 to flurry. Lo and behold, my monk gets an ADDITIONAL -2 when he wild attacks. So, overall, you're pretty much there. I'm -4 to hit. -11 with all your enchanter fanboy fighter's gear (maybe the reason I don't enjoy making silly comments about your character choice is because I'm not as good at it. Oh well).

But, let's see. You don't full attack, because "that style (is) the weakest around". Where I can pop a potion of Accelerate, port in, and unleash 12 attacks. Or, I can just do something else with my standard, and port in. Next turn, 12 attacks. 7 at my highest attack bonus. Unfortunately I have to burn ki points. Being a crit-based hungry ghost monk. Who constantly regens rage rounds, ki points, health, deals over 40 points of damage per hit, ....

Ugh, getting bored with this. Maybe I misread too much snark in your post, but it doesn't even matter. Casters > melee either way.


Hmm, you know, all this talk of Robocop and prosthetic limbs kind of makes me want to roll up a pistolero gunslinger with prosthetic limbs and eyes of the eagle reflavored as a red visor...


i appreciate your aesthetic Tels.

I'm not trying to say the Monk is better than the fighter, rather I'm seeing how close i can get a monk in terms of hit, damage and AC. This list only includes Enhancement bonus, and I'll put up the analysis up later comparing Attack, Damage, AC later, after this list gets vetted.

We got:
Weapon Enhancement , Stat Enhancement, Armor Enhancement, AC from RoProt/ANA and Price

I've already found and corrected some math errors from earlier today, but I've acquired the tired and can't brain anymore, so back to this later.

Gear
Lv3: Fighter Weapon:(+1) Stat Belt: -- Armor:+1 Ring/amulet:-- 1350 mwk
Lv3: Monk AoMF:(+1) Stat boost: -- Bracers:+1 Ring:-- 1350 (Mwk monk weapon)

Lv4: Fighter Weapon:+1 Stat Belt: -- Armor:+1 Ring/amulet:-- 3000/6000 can get their platemail
Lv4: Monk AoMF:(+1) Stat boost: -- Bracers:+1 Ring:-- 5000 push for the AoMF

Lv5: Fighter Weapon:+1 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+1 Ring/amulet:+1 9000gp
Lv5: Monk AoMF:+1 Stat boost: +2str Bracers:+1 Ring:-- 9000gp

Lv6: Fighter Weapon:+2 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+1 Ring/amulet:+1 15k
Lv6: Monk AoMF:+1 Stat boost: +2str Bracers:+1 Ring:+1 11k

Lv7: Fighter Weapon:+2 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+2 Ring/amulet:+1/1 20k
Lv7: Monk AoMF:+2/(1) Stat boost: +2str/(+2wis) Bracers:+1/2 Ring:+1 23k/18
Monk is pushing to get the +2 aomf by 7th or it can get +2AC

Lv8: Fighter Weapon:(+3)/2 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:(+2)/3 Ring/amulet:+1/1 30k/25k (+2 weapon can afford a CoRes)
Fighter is pushing to get the +3 by 8th
Lv8: Monk AoMF:+2 Stat boost: +2str,+2wis Bracers:+2 Ring:+1 30k

Lv9: Fighter Weapon:+3 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+1/1 35k (saving for gloves)
Lv9: Monk AoMF:+2 Stat boost: +2str,+2wis Bracers:+3 Ring:+1 35k

Lv10: Fighter Weapon:+3 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/1 Gloves 56k
Lv10: Monk AoMF:+2/3 Stat: boost +2str,+2wis Bracers:+3 Ring:+2 (Monk Robes) 54k/61k +3 AoMF or Robes

Lv11: Fighter Weapon:+3/4 Stat Belt: +4/2str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/1 68k/70k pick Str or Enh
Lv11: Monk AoMF:+3 Stat boost: +2str,+2wis Bracers:+3 Ring:+2 74k

Lv12: FighterWeapon:+4 Stat Belt: +4str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/2 88k
Lv12: Monk AoMF:+3 Stat boost: +4str,+2wis Bracers:+3 Ring:+2 86k

Lv13: Fighter Weapon:+5 Stat Belt: +4str Armor:+4 Ring/amulet:+2/2 113k
Lv13: Monk AoMF:+4 Stat boost: +4str,+2/4wis Bracers:+3 Ring/amulet:+2 114k/128k for wis

Lv14: FighterWeapon:+5 Stat Belt: +6str Armor:+5 Ring/amulet:+2/2 134k
Lv14: Monk AoMF:+4 Stat boost: +6str,+4wis Bracers:+3 Ring/amulet:+2 146k

Lv15: Fighter Weapon:+5 Stat Belt: +6str Armor:+5 Ring/amulet:+3/3 154k
Lv15: Monk AoMF:+5 Stat boost: +6str,+4wis Bracers:+3 Ring/amulet:+2 196k


I'm not sure I understand the layout of the chart. Would be interested in learning what each entry does mean, though.

Small tidbit of info, too: for quite a while, your standard, vanilla monk benefits more from using a temple sword than unarmed. Even past 7th level, when you start adding fun DR-passing abilities, even past 8th level, where now you have more base damage, it's still a better option, a lot of the time. +1 is, in fact, cheaper, and an additional +1 gives you Ki Focus.

So, an unarmed monk using a +2 AoMF at level 9 (doing 1d10+2 damage, and bypassing certain DR's), the same monk could instead buy a +1 Ki Focus Temple Sword (doing 1d8+1 damage, an average of two points less damage per hit) for HALF the cost (8k gp cheaper). And still be able to Stun through it, bypass the same DR's (or more, if you actually make the Temple Sword adamantine or something).

Both have pros and cons, but to assume that EVERY vanilla monk shuns weapons over unarmed attacks is a bit silly. It's just as monkish to use a quarterstaff as it is punch and kick, I mean.

EDITED TO ADD: And I'm kinda considering playing this build over the caster blaster in an upcoming campaign I'm playing in. The GM was concerned that I would overshadow the power of the other, more newbish players, but this monk might do better than a caster than acts as though his spells are all maximized (actually, more than maxed) for free. And I love the flavor of this guy. If I do choose to try to slip him in, I may talk to the DM about changing the flavor of the clockwork limbs into something else. A mystical stone implanted permanently into a certain limb to greatly enhance it's local ki, thus, the power of that limb.


I like the Enhanced arms idea.
What I'm going for with this build is the MoMS i posted before. Thanks to his feat selection, he is able to be about 1 to hit behind the fighter, and pretty close in damage up to 12th level, but it was pointed out that Items play a huge role and my other level by level comparison totally ignored AC bonuses.

So the preceding list shows the enhancement bonuses that could reasonably be purchased for the 2-handed Fighter control build and the unarmed Monk.

Here's how the chart is read:

First we have the Fighter and his items
Lv5: Fighter Weapon:+1 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+1 Ring/amulet:+1 9000gp
Next is the Monk
Lv5: Monk AoMF:+1 Stat boost: +2str Bracers:+1 Ring:-- 9000gp

THe list indicates that a Fighter can, at Lv5 reasonably expect to afford a +1 weapon, a +2 Belt of Giant's Strength, a set of +1 armor, and a Ring of Protection. This gear costs 9000gp

The monk OtOH, can afford his AoMF +1, the same Str Belt, and a set of +1 Bracers, but no ring, and the total cost of the Gear will be 9k as well.

Later you will see Monk with Stat Boost: +4str, +2wis, indicating that he has a Headband for wisdom in addition the the Belt. Fighter hows Stat Belt as they never take a Headband in this example.

So i have a list of the fighter's enhancements for his gear, Weapon, stat belt, armor and rings, as well as note the cost of the Enhance
then i got the monk's AoMF, belt and headband, Bracers and Ring of Prot.

NOTE beyond Level 10, remember that the fighter payed 1500 gp for his Gloves, and the Monk 1300 for monk robes, when looking at the pricing listed for 10-15

also:
an entry like: Fighter Weapon:+3/4 Stat Belt: +4/2str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/1 68k/70k indicates that the fighter can have either
Fighter Weapon:+4 Stat Belt: +2str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/1 70k
or
Fighter Weapon:+3 Stat Belt: +4str Armor:+3 Ring/amulet:+2/1 68k
as the fighter cannot afford a +4 belt AND a +4 weapon. The Belt gives more damage, but the weapon cuts through Adamantine DR.
THis occurs on occasion throughout the list. the character gets either the items in front of the "/" or behind, and uses the appropriate price.

Silver Crusade

In the opinion of those more learned on the monk (bleh.. I hate admitting that) which archetype does better as a whole. Martial artist (with maybe a 1-2 level dip elsewhere) or weapon adept no dip?


rorek55 wrote:
In the opinion of those more learned on the monk (bleh.. I hate admitting that) which archetype does better as a whole. Martial artist (with maybe a 1-2 level dip elsewhere) or weapon adept no dip?

IMO one of the best "standard unarmed build" for monks (meaning no armed varitions like zen archer, sohei or tetori) is a wis-based crusader cleric 1 / martial artist 19 (or if we want to optimise it even more, half-orc with sacred tattoo and shaman's apprentice crusader cleric 1 / bralwer 3 (or weapon master 3 according to the rulings of gloves of dueling) / living monolith 1 / martial artist 15, I believe that with 15 lvls of monk he still counts as a monk).

Use the fates's favored trait along divine favor for some a +2/+2 on attack and damage rolls, gloves of dueling for a +3/+3, grab a bane baldric, take guided hands (worship Irori), take weapon focus and greater weapon focus and you have a better than average attack bonus. 3 free enlarge person per day from the living monolith dip and another form the str domain, high wisdom for respectable exploit weakness, stunning fist and quivering palm DCs. With mantis style, ability focus (stunning fist) and stunning fist adept your stuning fist DC can also be more than decent. Also, you have access to pin down, so no more withdrawing ruining your full attacks.

Of course, a standard str-based warpriest of irori would be even more effective. And he can wear armor too for the brawling enchantment (which may ruin your monk image though). Dip two lvls of MoMS monk for dragon style and ferocity as usual and profit.

The same goes to the brawler arcehtype.

What you have and they do not is stunning fist. It is not enough to cover the ground, but it is something to diversify the monk and it can be pretty effective if you optimise on it and be wis-based.

Weapon adept does not even compete, unless you allow perfect strike to be used with a temple sword. Even then, I believe that he is outlclassed from both hungry ghost monk and sohei.

EDIT: Stunning fist adept does not stack with mantis style unfortunately, so mantis style it is, unless a better style can be suited in the build (snake is good but you probably do not have 3 free feats with the fighter-only options being available, I hear that the new wolf style is great but it needs high CMBs, so it is probably better for another kind of build).


Mechanical Pear wrote:

Okay, so, let's focus on my "robocop" monk (because using magical items in a fantasy setting is just silly, I agree), and not the vanilla sucky monk you envision.

By looking at my build, you'll see I only have a +2 Inherant bonus to Strength. At level 20, there's nothing stopping him from making that +4, I just didn't finish the item buying before I stopped working on him.

That explains a lot, yes.

Mechanical Pear wrote:

He starts with a 17 strength, puts every level bonus into strength, and has a +6 strength belt. So now, I'm actually, only 3 points of strength behind your fighter's.

And then we continue looking at my build, and see that he rages.

Your fighter isn't as strong as my monk :(

Correct, that puts your monk/barbarian ahead of my pure fighter in terms of strength score (assume starting at 18 including racial bonus, +5 leveling, +5 inherent, +6 belt) when raging (+4, I assume?). Want me to make a pure barbarian? or a barbarian/fighter?

BTW, how do you get around the monk's lawful and the barbarian's non-lawful alignment restrictions?

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Yes, he gets -2 to flurry. Lo and behold, my monk gets an ADDITIONAL -2 when he wild attacks. So, overall, you're pretty much there. I'm -4 to hit. -11 with all your enchanter fanboy fighter's gear (maybe the reason I don't enjoy making silly comments about your character choice is because I'm not as good at it. Oh well).

I generally don't make them either. And it's not gear, it's class abilities and class feats.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
But, let's see. You don't full attack, because "that style (is) the weakest around".

Er, no, that's not what I said. I implied that flurry-of-blows/two-weapon fighting was the weakest combat style around. Full attacking is just common sense when you can do it.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Where I can pop a potion of Accelerate, port in, and unleash 12 attacks. Or, I can just do something else with my standard, and port in. Next turn, 12 attacks. 7 at my highest attack bonus. Unfortunately I have to burn ki points. Being a crit-based hungry ghost monk. Who constantly regens rage rounds, ki points, health, deals over 40 points of damage per hit, ....

If they hit. You've managed to negate the strength difference, but that still leaves you -9 behind the fighter. Unless you meant to say that wild attacks give you another +2, so you are just -7 behind, -5 behind if you have somehow got Greater Rage, which is now getting close to acceptable given the number of attacks you have. How much damage your attacks do is tempered by odds to hit; half the chance to hit is half the damage after all.

Also....12 attacks? 7 from flurry, 1 from ki, 1 from haste or speed, I make that 9, four at top attack bonus. Am I missing something in your build? I admit I am not the world's greatest optimizer so I may well have.

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Ugh, getting bored with this. Maybe I misread too much snark in your post, but it doesn't even matter. Casters > melee either way.

You did read too much snark in it, believe me. I'm discussing mechanics is all. I can see the benefits of your build, but I can also see the problems with it - for one thing, it's not a build that works well off the bat, for another you are dipping other classes and making use of archetypes in order to make this work at high levels. Lastly...it's a classic example of "To be a good monk, you have to not be a monk" with five levels of non-monk mixed in.

Lastly, please remember, we are comparing a tricked-out build with a vanilla build, and you are pulling out every stop you can just to keep up. Doesn't that tell you something?

Mechanical Pear wrote:
Both have pros and cons, but to assume that EVERY vanilla monk shuns weapons over unarmed attacks is a bit silly. It's just as monkish to use a quarterstaff as it is punch and kick, I mean.

There is one problem with this surmise...almost all monk weapons suck. Even the temple sword is only average, and it's the best of the lot that do not need Exotic Weapon Proficiency to work (and many of them are terrible as well). Ki Focus property effectively doubles the weapon's cost, leaving you almost back in AoMF territory.

I do agree, some weapons are as much monkish as fighting unarmed. Problem is the monk doesn't get proficiency with a lot of the iconic ones that historical monks actually used - like the katana, for example, or the longsword (jian would be the equivelant, but functionally it's a longsword), scimitar, bows (save the Zen Archer and the Sohei), the shangou, etc. Without dipping cleric to get Crusader Flurry or fighter (weapon master) to get weapon training, the monk simply doesn't get proper access to decent weapons as every other martial class gets, and that's a big problem - and another reason the "iconic" monk is pushed toward unarmed combat.

I also want to point out that when I am comparing monk to another class, I am not assuming no archetypes, but I am assuming that the monk isn't dipping. You can make every other class work without dipping after all...if you have to dip to make the monk as effective as another class, it is to me more evidence that the monk is too weak as is.

Silver Crusade

So.
Law bringer assimar; martial artist
Str:18
Dex:12
con:14 (12+2)
Int:8
Wis:16(14+2)
Cha:7
Feats
1-combat reflexes,panther style
2-dodge
3-panther claw(huzzah for 3 attacks as free action before aoo)
5-panther parry
F1-weapon focus unarmed strike
F2-wep. Spec.,power attack
F3- ???
M6-???

Sovereign Court

rorek55 wrote:
In the opinion of those more learned on the monk (bleh.. I hate admitting that) which archetype does better as a whole. Martial artist (with maybe a 1-2 level dip elsewhere) or weapon adept no dip?

Well, I'm no expert on the Monk (only started playing one a few months ago for PFS). However, I have built a Martial Artist and played it for a bit.

Main reason was for the non-lawful aspect, so I could dip into Barbarian. (And I felt really dirty trying to grap the Adopted: Enlightened Warrior trait to use any archetype.)

Decided to go Strength-based, and wield a weapon as opposed to going unarmed, since a weapon is easier to enchant. My weapon of choice was the sansetsukon, since it's damage dice compared to unarmed is better until level 8, where they become the same, but the sansetsukon has a better crit range.

Only level 4 so far, and it seems to be working out. I relied on Potions of Mage Armor to help my AC while doing ok damage. Just bought a Cracked Vibrant Purple Prism Ioun Stone, so I can UMD my wand of Shield into it before combat, and use that on the first round. Will be picking up Bracers of Armor +1 probably after my next adventure.

May end up switching focus to wield a Temple Sword in one hand, buy a Cracked White Opalescent Pyramid Ioun Stone for a Whip in the other hand, and grab Mobility and Spring Attack at level 7 (already have Dodge). This way, I either Flurry with the Temple Sword, or if I need to move, Spring Attack in, Disarm or Trip with the Whip, and then continue moving next to the enemy (that way not to provoke).

As to Weapon Adept, it looks good as well. Perfect Strike only works on those specific Monk weapons, so you're out of luck there if you want to wield something like a Temple Sword. I kind of hate waiting until level 9 for Evasion though, since Reflex for half is a lot more common at low levels, but your mileage may vary.

Hopefully that was helpful.

Scarab Sages

Weapon master works out pretty well if you can figure out a way to have a reliable shillelagh on a quarter staff. It's hard to do without multiclassing though. It will also start to fall behind in mid levels, but it will last longer than the temple sword. Weapon master monk / Druid with the growth domain would be pretty good.

Dark Archive

Just saw wolf style and wolf savage (can't find wolf trip) and I sooo must have it. My overrun monk just blew his lid with those two (since he was considering scorpion style and punishing kick).

@dabbler the +30 was a typo and should have been +20. I also should add that fighter weapon enhancements are a main advantage for accuracy with them. They will receive an additional +1-2 from weapon enhancements and another + 1-2 from weapon training. More at higher levels. On average, at mid levels I determine that a fighter should be about 4 points ahead of a monk interns of accuracy. Not every optimized fighter gets weapon focus, grrater weapon focus, starts with 20 str and upgrades only that stat to the exclusion of all others, while only getting pure +1 enhancement bonuses on their weapons etc, etc.

Many of the arguments of fighter over monk are optimization arguments where the fighter turns into an elderly synthesis summoner with 7's and 5's in every physical stat, etc.

I don't think people generally make super narrow, almost non dimensional bland characters with absolutely no other hint of depth.

Even among optimizers we usually consider having at least something besides a more narrow than narrow focus.

This gets back to the 'my fighter can deal over 9 thousand damage per round and your monk only does 150? Please..)

And we need 9k per round because...?

Every enemy won't automatically function like a hyper efficient theory crafted optimized character would either. In fact, few enemies ever do. They aren't machines designed with programming to do absolutely one thing. This is why diplomacy, intimidate, combat maneuvers and the like exist within the game.

A 'real' fighter vs an optimized monk is a much more narrow gap as the fighter actually cares about things like ac, hp, maybe having an initiative that matters so the rare murder machine doesn't kill the wizard on round 1 anyway before the fighter can act. Some fighters recognize will saves as a weakness and actually wisely invest some stats into it. Nevermind the characters (please take that word with emphasis) that attempt to cover a few of the angles....all while still fighting -just fine-. These same fighters rarely miss and are almost guaranteed to hit any enemy on their first attack and highly likely on their second iterative.

These fighters don't need the weapon focus feats or maybe they don't need 30 str.
Maybe they have a +2 flaming or defending or dancing weapon or even just a +3 with a different property or two. Nobody complains that these fighters 'can't do their role' or that they suck. They don't suck. They can fulfill their role. So when an optimized monk comes in that can function similarly in general and better in some specific offensive areas (or equally) people cry foul. Yes, agreed- the monk has a harder time being offensive on the really powerful monsters than the fighter.
Yes, it takes an optimized monk (whether through dipping or system mastery) to function well (or superbly, because they CAN excel). Typically, I find that when someone makes an optimized monk, it also has a lot of character depth and flavor and style- no pun intended.

When people make optimized fighters, and even barbarians it seems, it almost instantly enters the world of 'but that isn't a real character and even if it was nothing about it is actually needed to do the job. You went above and beyond the step that was past overkill').

You do have another good point, though: the fact that a vanilla fighter with minimal system optimization can dramatically outshine a monk in very specific combat related fields, going above what is needed all the time.

Finally, let's be honest: if every game all of your combats were two round combats, you would be bored and not really enjoy the game too much. There wouldn't be much room for tactical decision making, little or no suspense, and if you are the ones winning, then two round combats all day cheapen your victories since so little effort was expended.

Two round fights change spell preparation and feat choices among a host of other things. If you are limiting interaction to the point that there is hardly any, then the character might have missed some key element of the game.

In PFS I have been in more than one group with just a single (or more) optimized robot of death and whenever their turn came up, something died. It didn't matter what it was (except the boss-those do take them 1-2 rounds to kill). I have had my turns come up and felt utterly useless. Sure, 1-3 enemies are still standing and maybe I am injured and otherwise might have drop on the next enemy turn but being a fifth wheel sucks. Being optimized as any class and being a fifth wheel because everyone is too good at what they do sucks. It is boring and I have spent more than a few rounds intentional skipping my turn because no action I took was of any value.

I am not saying optimization is bad. I love it. But there is a point, you know? In those super lethal battles-I love me some optimizers. But in those fights, regardless of the risks, I want the 3 round battle instead of 2 (or the monks 4).

Just long enough to experience the moment but not so long that I'm saving vs my 4th death effect etc.

Silver Crusade

Another idea

master of many styles/drunken master 15/brawler 3/2???


rorek55 wrote:

Another idea

master of many styles/drunken master 15/brawler 3/2???

Eh if I was going into MoMS I don't really see the benefit in going 15 levels into it no flurry, no real uses for your ki(since you can't get the extra attack without flurry) until you trade out stuff for it with qinggong at most I might go to 8 if I really wanted a third style fusion but it's not really worth it.

MoMS & Drunken Master 4/Brawler 3/ Drunken Brute&Invulnerable Rager Barbarian 13 would probably be better although even then both the Drunken archetypes are pretty bad in terms of value.


Imbicatus wrote:
Weapon master works out pretty well if you can figure out a way to have a reliable shillelagh on a quarter staff. It's hard to do without multiclassing though. It will also start to fall behind in mid levels, but it will last longer than the temple sword. Weapon master monk / Druid with the growth domain would be pretty good.

I would argue that if you are willing to multiclass, a temple sword weapon master can raise his attack bonuses with the 3 lvl dip in fighter for gloves of dueling and eventually make his 17-20/x2 weapon to count more that a quarterstaff that loses its edge (shillelagh) relatively early in the game.


Dark Immortal wrote:

Just saw wolf style and wolf savage (can't find wolf trip) and I sooo must have it. My overrun monk just blew his lid with those two (since he was considering scorpion style and punishing kick).

@dabbler the +30 was a typo and should have been +20. I also should add that fighter weapon enhancements are a main advantage for accuracy with them. They will receive an additional +1-2 from weapon enhancements and another + 1-2 from weapon training. More at higher levels. On average, at mid levels I determine that a fighter should be about 4 points ahead of a monk interns of accuracy. Not every optimized fighter gets weapon focus, grrater weapon focus, starts with 20 str and upgrades only that stat to the exclusion of all others, while only getting pure +1 enhancement bonuses on their weapons etc, etc.

Many of the arguments of fighter over monk are optimization arguments where the fighter turns into an elderly synthesis summoner with 7's and 5's in every physical stat, etc.

I don't think people generally make super narrow, almost non dimensional bland characters with absolutely no other hint of depth.

Even among optimizers we usually consider having at least something besides a more narrow than narrow focus.

This gets back to the 'my fighter can deal over 9 thousand damage per round and your monk only does 150? Please..)

And we need 9k per round because...?

Every enemy won't automatically function like a hyper efficient theory crafted optimized character would either. In fact, few enemies ever do. They aren't machines designed with programming to do absolutely one thing. This is why diplomacy, intimidate, combat maneuvers and the like exist within the game.

A 'real' fighter vs an optimized monk is a much more narrow gap as the fighter actually cares about things like ac, hp, maybe having an initiative that matters so the rare murder machine doesn't kill the wizard on round 1 anyway before the fighter can act. Some fighters recognize will saves as a weakness and actually wisely invest some...

Wait, you're basically stating that many arguments are comparing a Monk to an optimized fighter and that invalidates it, despite the fact that in most comparisons are between an optimized Monk to that of an optimized Fighter?

I mean, that Robocop Katana Monk posted previously is a great build and highly optimized, but it's only ever going to keep up with a Fighter, let a lone a hyper-optimized fighter. That's not even taking into account Barbarians, Paladins or Rangers and that's just the martials. You also have the Magi, Alchemists and Druids who can whoop some serious ass if they have half a mind to do so.

I mean, this guy had to cut off two of his bloody limbs to do what he does. I've known 3 people in my life that have lost limbs, one of whom lost his in Iraq and plays at my table. All three have stated, without hesitation, that if they had one wish, it would be to have their limb back.

This is a guy literally paying an arm and a leg just to be good. Think about that. He is deliberately sacrificing things real people would give almost anything to get back, just to be able to fight better.

How 'Monk' is a guy if he's cutting off his arm and replacing it with a robotic limb so he can punch better? The Monk is supposed to be a warrior that masters his inner energy and trains his body to be a perfect weapon. Not cutting it off and replacing it because it's not good enough.


Tels wrote:
...

Haven't you ever heard of getting rid of the deadweight? Well apparently monks nowadays take that saying very literally. =P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gnomersy wrote:
Tels wrote:
...
Haven't you ever heard of getting rid of the deadweight? Well apparently monks nowadays take that saying very literally. =P

I have the Head of Vecna in my dungeon if you wish to undergo a minor surgery... :P


Dark Immortal wrote:
Just saw wolf style and wolf savage (can't find wolf trip)

Here:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/wolf-trip-wolf-style

Silver Crusade

gnomersy wrote:
rorek55 wrote:

Another idea

master of many styles/drunken master 15/brawler 3/2???

Eh if I was going into MoMS I don't really see the benefit in going 15 levels into it no flurry, no real uses for your ki(since you can't get the extra attack without flurry) until you trade out stuff for it with qinggong at most I might go to 8 if I really wanted a third style fusion but it's not really worth it.

MoMS & Drunken Master 4/Brawler 3/ Drunken Brute&Invulnerable Rager Barbarian 13 would probably be better although even then both the Drunken archetypes are pretty bad in terms of value.

Its late but a moms with panther/dragon/ tiger and (either monkey, snake, orcrane depending on what you want). All at once is extremely nasty. With the 3-5 brawler dip + gloves to offset the to hit and give him some extra damage.


Feral Combat Training (Combat)

Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike, Weapon Focus with selected natural weapon.

Benefit: Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.

Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature.

Druid 8/Monk 12, mix and start how you will, but at 8th level a druid can transform into a hippopotamus behemoth. 4d8 bite plus strength and a half, and with Feral Combat Training at 20th level you can make 5 attacks at +16/+16/+11/+11/+6 BAB. Give whatever magic items and stats you want, those are great base statistics. Don't forget you're also getting a +6 to strength from the wild shape.


rorek55 wrote:

Its late but a moms with panther/dragon/ tiger and (either monkey, snake, orcrane depending on what you want). All at once is extremely nasty. With the 3-5 brawler dip + gloves to offset the to hit and give him some extra damage.

Eh that's the AoOp response build isn't it?

I've always considered it a pretty boring one trick pony, after all nothing forces the enemy to attack you and once they see you do it once or twice an intelligent enemy will just let you move and then focus your friends who don't have those benefits and if you're the one attacking your ability to do damage is even less impressive than a normal monk's.

Silver Crusade

Not true. Dragon/tiger give you an really nice damage boost on top of the brawler levels for added damage. Plus at higher levels you could have potienally 1-2 styles to swap to after they stop trying to hit you .

Aside from that drunken master gives you free extra damage.

If all that fails why would intelligent enemies let you play pin the fist to the hhealers/wizards face all you want?


gnomersy wrote:
rorek55 wrote:

Its late but a moms with panther/dragon/ tiger and (either monkey, snake, orcrane depending on what you want). All at once is extremely nasty. With the 3-5 brawler dip + gloves to offset the to hit and give him some extra damage.

Eh that's the AoOp response build isn't it?

I've always considered it a pretty boring one trick pony, after all nothing forces the enemy to attack you and once they see you do it once or twice an intelligent enemy will just let you move and then focus your friends who don't have those benefits and if you're the one attacking your ability to do damage is even less impressive than a normal monk's.

A Dragon/Snake/Tiger style build is better as your attacks don't rely on the enemy attacking you first.

Panther Style relies on the enemy actually attacking you, and, like gnomersy said, once it's done once or twice, that won't happen anymore. Drangon/Snake/Tiger lets you get your full attack, and then if the enemy attacks back, you gain additional attacks.

Scarab Sages

5 people marked this as a favorite.

You cannot convince some people that Monks are fine. They have it in their head (and its obvious in the comparisons to fighters/barbarians/rangers) that being a Monk is less "powerful" or less "optimized" than what they deem to be a comparable class.

No amount of "but in this game I saw" will ever convince them.

No amount of "why are you soloing a CR20 critter and why are you doing it in an open, featureless plain with no cover or small enclosed areas" will ever convince them.

Just look at every OTHER monk thread and you will see the same few people, who regardless of build or evidence, continually decry how much suckier a monk is than a fighter.

Give it up already. The build doesn't matter. They cannot be convinced that the Monk doesn't need a complete rebuild to their specifications. Countless other people who have played and enjoyed the class have opinions that do not matter to these people.

So the Monk can't solo a lvl 20 Demon or Devil or whatever in the same short time that a BSF or CAGM Barbarian can.

Who give a s*** when people still enjoy playing them.

If you don't like a Monk and want to build a "better" character that CAN solo the Baelor in 2 rounds then do that instead.

This endless back and forth and unbudging/unwavering hardon for Monk suckitude is old, quick.

And when you ultimately distill the argument against why Monks "suck" so bad, it all comes down to "because you need system mastery to build one effectively" or some other garbage opinion.

As if a poorly built, unoptimized Wizard with a lousy spell book and poorly built spell book stands a chance. As if a fighter with badly chosen feat trees and unoptimized gear is any different.

Now....GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

301 to 350 of 581 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / The most powerful Monk? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.