|
I think before we get into how to "fix" the monk, we need to decide what it is we're trying to fix it to be. Is it supposed to be a damage dealer, able to stand alongside the fighter or the barbarian in damage output? Is it a variety of skillmonkey, so it should be able to use its skills to increase its tactical and out-of-combat utility, like the rogue? Is it some kind of "fifth slot" class that shouldn't replace any of the "core four," but has some kind of special utility when added to a group that already has the basics covered, like the bard?
For me, what I'd like to see is a melee debuffer, a "fifth slot" class that doesn't necessarily do all the heavy lifting on its own but makes it much, much easier for the rest of the group to do their jobs. This is because I think it's closest to what it is now, but also because it's not really a role that currently exists in the core classes.
By a melee debuffer, what I mean is someone who takes on the opponents by both damaging them and weakening their ability to act against the party - in the monk's case, by entirely depriving the monk's target of actions, if successful. The monk already has abilities that do this, to a certain extent: it's the basic function of grappling or tripping, and is the raison d'etre of stunning fist. With the addition of Scorpion Style and Gorgon's Fist, there are even more such options in the monk's arsenal.
The problem is, they still aren't very good. Scorpion Style is pretty weak sauce; Stunning Fist has to be declared before the attack, which at first level has decided parallels to the paladin problem; Gorgon's Fist is a standard action, so it's not compatible with flurry of blows or additional attacks via ki expenditure. And Gorgon's Fist, Stunning Fist and Scorpion Style all have Fortitude saves, which is generally the best save of most monsters. I have seen a really nasty round-1-flurry-stun-trip-round-2-Gorgon's-Fist-AoO-repeat combo come from a monk, but it simply wasn't sustainable.
Still, I think it has potential, and might serve to not only strengthen the monk, but also give it a clear niche around which to focus its abilities.
What about the rest of you? What is the monk? What should we try to make it be?
|
Good summary, Shisumo. I certainly see the Monk as a "fifth slot". I reject all calls for increasing a Monk's BAB. I don't see the Monk's purpose being a Fighter replacement. If you want a Fighter, then play a Fighter.
For myself, I play upon a few Monk key abilities:
- fast movement, tumbling around/through enemy squares, getting to where he is needed the most in any situation fast;
- grappling, non-lethal damage, diplomacy - a pacifist, a defender, someone who strives to eliminate threats quickly, but keep them alive for questioning afterwards.
Monks are fighters, but their methods are more subtle, and should be played to their strengths, and characterised for their flavour.
I'm with you on the "fifth slot" idea. I can't think of many (any?) monks that have been displayed in any media, charging in to take down whole armies, or even large amounts of people. When i think of "monk", I get the idea of "Iron Monkey", or any amount of Jackie Chan movies (and others in the same vein), where he's just a very skilled guy that avoids fighting if possible, but if it comes to a fight, will have little (do note the difference between "little" and "no") trouble convincing their opponent that a fight may not have been in their best interests.
I like the idea of Scorpion Style, but before that, there was any number of the stat-reducing strikes (Freezing the Lifeblood, Falling Star Touch, etc) that provided some benefit to having a monk as an "assist-type" rather than a "Front/Back" line character.
I would love to see more of the "debuff" type of monk, or at least the Ki abilities, that have effects such as "X ki points, reduce target's {Stat} by 1d4/6 for 2+Wis Mod rounds", or other funky things that fall somewhere between the purview of "limb removal" and "magical effect". Sure you could reduce someone's strength by cutting off an arm.. or by casting Curse on them. But what about a temporary manipulation of the energy in everything to just hamper him long enough to be subdued -- or for the fighter to "Subdue" them?
Falling down the side of a building? No problem. Coaxing unusual feats out of your body? Not a problem. Someone who is dedicated to mastering what their body can do, and pushing it further.. "Perfect Self, Diamond Body, etc" After all, not every fight needs to be a physical thing, and sometimes, you may be better off for it.
Monk is definitely a 'fifth slot' he does not perform any of the 'standard' party functions as well as Fighter, Wizard, Rogue & Cleric, but is nice to have around in a larger party.
If I had to define a role, I would say 'FLANKER'.
Of course all of the above is subject to RACE and CLASS adjustments accordingly. (Ex: Starting out with Fighter level or Being a Dwarf with High Con.)
|
|
"Flanker" is not a character class role. Flanking is what animal companions and summon spells are for. While I realize that not ever party will have a conjuror or a druid handy, if your entire contribution to the party can be made obsolete by a single full-round action from another class, you need a better schtick.
It does raise a point, though. If the idea that comes to mind is "Flanker" when someone mentions a monk, something needs to be looked at and changed.
The monk is an unarmed fighter who can perform some flashy, semi-mystical moves.
Monks are not flankers to me. They are the anti-flanker/spellchucker. They have incredible speed that can be used to get behind frontlines without getting hit via acrobatics. They do great damage that you can't take away from them by rusting their weapon or heating it or what not. Spell resistance comes in later and they start with great saves and evasion which means most spellcasters are in real trouble if facing a monk. Rogue's have to find a way to flank a monk which is really hard to do if the person playing the monk pays attention to what he is doing. With an excellence touch AC monk's are even more the anti wizard.
When I'm playing a monk I look for the big hitters on the other side and take the fight to them while everyone else is wading through the goons. I know I can't handle the mass fight but I can stop the wizard or stun the rogue so he isn't sneak attacking.
The monk is the "pre-emptive strike" of D&D and the "pro-active defense" of a party.
The monk is an unarmed fighter who can perform some flashy, semi-mystical moves.
Seconded. If we could use the Fighter's bonus feats to emulate the unarmored and unarmed part of the Monk, as well as some of the more exotic things he does, then we'd use Fighters. But such things are not available. Using a Fighter (or a Barbarian or a Ranger) to do an unarmed combatant is lackluster at best. There are some things in the Monk class that fit the "Generic Unarmed Combatant" that we use the Monk class to create. It's just all the other stuff that comes along with it (alignment requirements, not-full BAB (as in "less accuracy", not "fewer attacks"), "Whoa, I know Tongue-Fu", etc.) that make us wish for a better Monk.
|
|
The monk is an unarmed fighter who can perform some flashy, semi-mystical moves.Seconded. If we could use the Fighter's bonus feats to emulate the unarmored and unarmed part of the Monk, as well as some of the more exotic things he does, then we'd use Fighters. But such things are not available. Using a Fighter (or a Barbarian or a Ranger) to do an unarmed combatant is lackluster at best. There are some things in the Monk class that fit the "Generic Unarmed Combatant" that we use the Monk class to create. It's just all the other stuff that comes along with it (alignment requirements, not-full BAB (as in "less accuracy", not "fewer attacks"), "Whoa, I know Tongue-Fu", etc.) that make us wish for a better Monk.
So am I reading this right that you want a monk that can replace a fighter or barbarian in the core four as primary damage output?
Monks are not flankers to me. They are the anti-flanker/spellchucker. With an excellence touch AC monk's are even more the anti wizard. I know I can't handle the mass fight but I can stop the wizard or stun the rogue so he isn't sneak attacking.
That would be an excellent point IF the monk could reliably disrupt spellcasting... but, sadly, in 3.0/3.5/PF, he can't. The Spellcraft (formerly Concentration) DCs to cast defensively are just too easy to make, and if the monk has to specifically ready an action to disrupt, he's not moving around -- he's standing there with a readied action he can't use, because the wizard just moved 30 ft. away and then cast the spell from there. Allowing the monk (and fighter, for that matter) to immediately move and attack in response to enemy actions would be a good start towards making the monk into what you describe -- in essence, we'd need to fundamentally change the readied action rules. Which I'd love to do.
Allowing the monk (and fighter, for that matter) to immediately move and attack in response to enemy actions would be a good start towards making the monk into what you describe -- in essence, we'd need to fundamentally change the readied action rules. Which I'd love to do.
Huh. This sounds suspiciously like "What we'd have to do to fix the fighter" as well.
Maybe instead of class abilities, we could create a new combat option similar to ready action, called Intercept that allows you to declare you are following a specific character. You take no movement on your turn, but at the end of the target character's turn you may take the shortest path to close the distance between you.
Needs more thought, but I think a universal option that made interception possible in Pathfinder has more appeal than giving special movement options to specific classes.
Monks are not flankers to me. They are the anti-flanker/spellchucker. With an excellence touch AC monk's are even more the anti wizard. I know I can't handle the mass fight but I can stop the wizard or stun the rogue so he isn't sneak attacking.That would be an excellent point IF the monk could reliably disrupt spellcasting... but, sadly, in 3.0/3.5/PF, he can't. The Spellcraft (formerly Concentration) DCs to cast defensively are just too easy to make, and if the monk has to specifically ready an action to disrupt, he's not moving around -- he's standing there with a readied action he can't use, because the wizard just moved 30 ft. away and then cast the spell from there. Allowing the monk (and fighter, for that matter) to immediately move and attack in response to enemy actions would be a good start towards making the monk into what you describe -- in essence, we'd need to fundamentally change the readied action rules. Which I'd love to do.
Taking readied actions isn't really the best way to distrupt casters. Grappiling would be better, as the monk can apply unarmed strikes easily (beat a grapple check? Even with a BAB the same as that of a cleric this should be easy against arcane spellcasters).
Needs more thought, but I think a universal option that made interception possible in Pathfinder has more appeal than giving special movement options to specific classes.
Consider me sold, if we can convince Jason.
Taking readied actions isn't really the best way to distrupt casters. Grappiling would be better, as the monk can apply unarmed strikes easily (beat a grapple check? Even with a BAB the same as that of a cleric this should be easy against arcane spellcasters).
I might be confused, but can't the wizard cast while grappled, but just needs to make a Spellcraft check to keep the spell? In that case, grappling him is no worse that threatening him -- it's a waste of time -- Spellcraft bonuses rapidly outstrip static DCs. If grappling totally prevents spellcasting, then you're talking my language. Also, can you move and grapple in the same round?
I might be confused, but can't the wizard cast while grappled, but just needs to make a Spellcraft check to keep the spell? In that case, grappling him is no worse that threatening him -- it's a waste of time -- Spellcraft bonuses rapidly outstrip static DCs. If grappling totally prevents spellcasting, then you're talking my language. Also, can you move and grapple in the same round?
If they are only grappled they can cast spells, but being pinned is a whole other issue.
So am I reading this right that you want a monk that can replace a fighter or barbarian in the core four as primary damage output?
I see the Monk as being the best avenue for an unarmed, unarmored combatant. I'd like to see the Monk as good at fighting in that way as the Fighter and the Barbarian do in their's (mastery of equipment and "Hulk Smash", respectively).
Actually, what I'd like to see is a straight-up Martial Artist class. Let the Campaign Setting create (and if it must, dictate and enforce) a monastery locale that absolutely no one could learn martial arts from without having studied there. The core class should be setting-neutral.
Do I want the Monk to replace the Fighter and Barbarian? No, but I'd like him to be just as viable an option as those two. Many people use the Monk as "Unarmed Combatant" and the "ascetic, Shaolin, lawful only" part is just something they have to put up with.
If they are only grappled they can cast spells, but being pinned is a whole other issue.
Thanks, KEJR. The next question is, can you reliably move up to a wizard, grapple him, and pin him before he casts a spell? I seem to recall that grapple has been altered quite a bit, but I don't have my Beta handy at the moment.
Needs more thought, but I think a universal option that made interception possible in Pathfinder has more appeal than giving special movement options to specific classes.Consider me sold, if we can convince Jason.
By way of answering the OP:
I believe the Monk is an "interceptor." Mr. Bulmahn went into detail during the alpha playtest about the Monk's ability to traverse ground and deal with caster targets and other high priority targets.
Problem arise because a turn-based system limits the tactical value of interception. This same problem hurts the fighter as well. I've started a thread discussing a possible fix
here.
Yeah, I kinda see the monk as a "fifth slot" myself... "fifth slot" as in "whatever is this guy doing here????"
Not to hurt sensibilities, but context-wise I see no place for oriental characters in occidental fantasy, and mechanics wise he fills no 'hard' roles in a party... however, while the Monk has no "pure virtue" that makes in excel at anything in particular, he has a virtue no other character has... self-sufficiency:
1) Survivable vs Spellcasters: Improved Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Immunities AND the best saving throws in game assure that the Monk won't be the first character to fall when the party faces a spellcaster.
2) Self-buffs: The Monk needs no spellcaster to fight a Werewolf.
3) Self-heals: As long as he survives an encounter, a Monk will rarely need more than a couple of days to be back in top shape.
4) Skills: A decent amount of skill points per level plus a skill set that's just right for adventuring.
5) Consummate Acrobat: Athletic skills plus his own Extraordinary and Supernatural abilities ensures not only that Li Mu Bai will always arrive anyplace you want him to, but also he'll look damn cool while doing so.
6) Minor, utilitarian Supernatural Abilities: Etherealness, Dimension Door, Tongues.
While a Monk may not have a wow area to call their "forte", he has no glaring weaknesses eiter, contrary to the other classes (Will saves for Fighters, Death magic for Rogues, etc). Also, having bits of this and that all over, a well played Monk becomes the most survivable character ever. The tricky area here, ironically, is head-on combat, as the Monk lacks the potential for raw strength other character classes have, nor he has the AC or HP to survive heavy-duty. There are ways to overcome this though:
One-on-One: Combat Maneuvers for the win. "Enemy who can't see, enemy that can't fight" and so on... your raw combat stats may suck, but you can always take your opponent down to your level.
Multiple Attackers: This is where a Monk can go down faster than presto due to his lack of AC and HP, but the Monk's Fast Movement feature assures that if you have Spring Attack they'll never be able to lay a finger on you while you hit-and-run them to death. Some enemies will draw ranged weapons as soon as they realise your game, however, so you'll want to have Cover nearby between attacks.
In conclusion, contrary to classes like the Fighter, the Cleric, and the Wiz/Sor, the Monk wasn't meant to be a team player in that he can't take care of anyone other than himself, but presicely for this, if there's a character class that can make his way in the world on his own, it's the Monk.
What is the Monk to me? A Solo player
The only problem I see in playing a Monk is people's common misconception of what "Lawful" means. In the average table, the average DM will badger you with the "respecting the law" common crap, when the REAL Lawful aspects from the Monk comes from being a character who has discipline as a way of life: things like waking up with the sunrise to train, only eating what will keep you healthy and in shape, and everything else that comes with being an acomplished martial artist. The quintessential example of a Monk-class character who doesn't "abide by the laws" is the Ninja, even a "nukenin" who ran away from his clan and gets by as a mercenary for the highest bidder is still Ninja (even if disgraced ninja). However, I don't feel like explaining this every time I play at a different gaming table, so I rarely play Monks.