The speed is an incredible asset and something that no other class can really match.
I keep hearing this, and it's strange to me.
I'm not saying speed isn't useful - but this idea that Monk's are faster than the other classes I mean.
Wizards, Bards and Sorcerers can run circles around a Monk with a phantom steed. Eventually, when the monk is moving 90', these classes are flying at 240'
A Druid come level 4 is running around at 60' while the Monk is moving at 40'. The Druid keeps this advantage right to the point where they are flying 100' (perfect).
So that leaves Clerics, Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Rogues and Barbarians (who actually begin the game faster than Monks)
So it seems to me, if focusing on speed is your plan, the Monk is a so-so choice at best. Purely middle of the road.
The ability to move through combat fluidly and with little detriment is an incredible ability NO other class can match.
If we're talking about speed again, yes they can. Not only can they match it, they can do it better.
3/4 BAB, d8 HD, the skills, class abilities like evasion, and speed to maneuver in combat make them an incredibly valuable class.
I dunno. Look at Druids for example. They also get 3/4 BAB, d8 HD, the skills, speed to manuever in combat - they don't get evasion - but being a full caster on top of everything is a bit better than evasion I think. We haven't gotten into the animal companion yet either.
Also, I think offensively, Druids have an edge in doing damage.
Just because they're not a tank doesn't mean they're not worth playing.
I certainly agree with that. I'm also not convinced the Monk is a bad class (I haven't played with builds or anything)
However- saying they are a good class because of "speed" is not going to take you very far.
At best, they're meant to be harassers like the rogue. They just do it in a different way.
However, when a rogue harasses you, he rips your head off with one hit. SA damage is a huge offensive boost. Is the Monk getting anything to compare?
The monk only needs one thing, a class power along the lines of
Shattering Palm
From level 4 onwards, as a swift action, the monk may spend 1 ki point to ignore the first 5 points of DR a creature has for 1 round. At level 10 this improves to ignore the first 10 points of DR.
And, if this isn't enough, also:
Monk Combat Focus
From level 6 onwards a monk may, as a move action, spend 2 ki points to gain the effects of Greater Magic Claw as a spell-like ability. Their caster level for the spell is their monk level.
While I don't think that the monk is AWFULLY underpowered, it's problem is mainly that it can't fill the role it's supposed to have, either in combat or out of it.
The monk is quite roguish, and I think it should be treated like that - though a little more skilled in combat and a little less sneaky. However, it lacks vital rogue abilities, such as Trapfinding and Disable Device as class skill, which means you have to take a rogue in the party too (excluding spells and such, and I do think Detect Traps is a bit unwieldy).
In combat, it's supposed to be harassment and support - but it doesn't do it well enough, generally, as many other classes will outshine it. It's speed, as said by Treantmonk, is decent but not the best around (though I do think it's fair to say that being able to move and attack instead of having to demount and mount a phantom horse every turn is quite a boon). It's harassment abilities is decent, losing power at higher levels, but mostly decent. However, they could use a little boost.
It should be said that the monk can be great against spellcasters. Not only does it have mobility with quite high speed and the ability to tumble, it also has spell resistance, evasion, bonus against mind-affecting, and none of the abilities can be dispelled! That's a key difference between a monk and for example a phantom steed.
One thing though, that I think that the monk archetype includes and that would be quite nice, is an improved ability to support the teammates.
Some thoughts on how matters could be handled:
Grant them a "sixth sense" ability that improves their ability to search; maybe +Wis to search checks, as well as allowing a free check whenever moving within 5'. No need to improve the ability do disable the traps though, the rogue still needs to be best at traps.
Lower the base speed increases of the monk, but at some point, give them a free move each turn of say 30 ft. More or less, their 5' step is increased to a 30' step, though it provokes AoO as usual. That way they can move a little and still do a full attack.
Slow Fall - Seriously, this ability is quite lame. Or rather, it's nice, but it's far too situational to warrant being spread out the way it is. I'd say, give Slow Fall 40ft at level 4 and Slow Fall any distance at level 8. It's used so rarely, you'll likely never use half the tiers anyway.
At these levels where SF would have improved, give modes of movement, something like this:
(3): Act as if having Spider Climb as long as climb is at least 1 rank
6: Levitation by concentrating max 1 min/level per day
10: Climb and Swim speed 20 ft. as long as each skill is at 8 ranks
12: Levitation by concentrating at will
14: Climb and Swim speed 40 ft. as long as each skill is at 12 ranks
16: Levitation without concentration at will
18: Climb and Swim speed 60 ft. as long as each skill is at 16 ranks
20: Fly speed 20ft (perfect) at will
Give a bonus to their CMB - For example, allow spending 1 Ki point to add 1d6+Wis to CMB for one turn.
Give abilities that are pro-friends instead of only anti-enemy. Examples include:
Wholeness of Body (Su): At 7th level or higher, a monk can heal his own wounds as a standard action. He can heal a number of hit points of damage equal to his monk level by using 2 points from his ki pool. He can also heal the wounds of a teammate as a standard action. By using 3 points from his ki pool, he can heal a number of hit points of damage equal to his level.
Well-placed Aid (Ex): The monk can discern where and how his aid is needed the most. When he uses the Aid Another action, the bonus is equal to +2 or his Wisdom modifier, whichever is higher.
EDIT: An additional thing that could make a very large difference is the ability to replenish ki points without resting. For example, allowing the monk to replenish a single key point by resting for 10 minutes will allow them to use ki abilities a little more freely and remove a big limitation they have right now, without allowing them to use ki points all the time - because now, they are restricted the way wizards are, but with far less power.
---------------
I think this is the kind of things they need, rather than higher HD and BAB; things that enhance their role as mobile, supportive and disruptive. All these are just ideas on individual changes, I do not propose that one should incorporate all of these (don't know if that would make it even over-powered).
|
Something to consider that probably has not been suggested: allow monks to replace base weapon damage of monk weapons with their unarmed damage base.
Suddenly, you gain slashing, piercing, trip, disarm, and short ranged monk attacks that actually mean something and can be enhanced just like any other weapons.
|
Lower the base speed increases of the monk, but at some point, give them a free move each turn of say 30 ft. More or less, their 5' step is increased to a 30' step, though it provokes AoO as usual. That way they can move a little and still do a full attack.
One of the many reasons for the Monk being discouraged, dismissed or outright banned by many DMs I know (over several editions), has been the sense that it is a 'silly' class, with 'anime' powers.
A large part of that is down to the fast movement ability.
Having one PC that can perform a casual stroll at double the rate other PCs can run, just seems to rub some people up the way (as I can attest from the coments in my own game, which includes a Scout, with a mere 40' move...).
It just brings to mind the Olympics, when you sit down expecting a long-distance running event, and find it's the 'fast walk' event instead, where all the competitors waddle along like they've crapped their pants. No offence to anyone who does this event; I admire your endurance, but it does look rather silly.
Having to imagine that one of your fellow PCs is doing this 24/7 does strain some people's belief.
I'd much rather see the fast movement be used in short bursts, activated by the adrenaline of a stressful situation.
To compensate for losing the ability to walk a million miles/day, the Monk could gain abilities such as Mobility, Spring Attack, or the ability to cover 10' with a 5' step, when using this burst.
Though that may require a separate point pool, it would be an improvement to me.
|
|
...likeseriouslywhat.
So you're fine with characters getting so angry that they grow fangs, music which can hypnotize people into doing your bidding, characters with pet dinosaurs or alligators or bears, and everything that magic can do, but walking quickly is a big issue for an itinerant monk concept?
It's not a problem for me, just for a lot of DMs I've known.
If the fast movement were short, sharp bursts, I think a lot of the Monk-hate out there might die down, and the players in my area might get to play the class once in a while.
One of the many reasons for the Monk being discouraged, dismissed or outright banned by many DMs I know (over several editions), has been the sense that it is a 'silly' class, with 'anime' powers.
Yes, and I agree that it has quite "anime" powers (or jedi powers, maybe), but it's quite impossible to have that kind of character become powerful without giving it "anime"-style powers.
If you don't want that kind of powers, fine with me, but then there's no way to make the monk decent.Also, when we arrive at high levels (16+) many classes may look quite animeish, simply because anime is the only place where you will find such powerful characters (the skin of a high-level barbarian is so thick, spears bounce of while he chops down the castle walls with his adamentine greataxe). LotR characters are probably never over level 10, and rarely cross 5 or 6.
I've tried to make a less supernatural monk for a long time, but I've realized that then it's easier to just make a fighter focused at unarmed combat. And if one doesn't want overblown, extreme powers that are otherwise only found among gods and anime, one shouldn't play high-level D&D. One should play E6.
Personally, I could otherwise see the monk as a PrC instead of a base class. I think it's a little to specific to warrant a base class, but on the other hand I'm quite restrictive of those (I also think Paladin, Barbarian, Bard, Ranger, and Druid could go, as well as all the coming APHB classes)
A large part of that is down to the fast movement ability.
Having one PC that can perform a casual stroll at double the rate other PCs can run, just seems to rub some people up the way (as I can attest from the coments in my own game, which includes a Scout, with a mere 40' move...).//
Having to imagine that one of your fellow PCs is doing this 24/7 does strain some people's belief.
It can't. Even a level 20 monk (and at level 20, we're talking virtual demigods) a monk can "casually walk" 90 ft. while a running human can move 120.
Still, as said above, a level 5 wizard can move at the same speed as that 20 monk, though only for a few minutes per day.//
Why should he move so fast always? I can't imagine the human rogue will move at a 30' speed when walking with the gnome cleric at his 15'. The human will simply move slower, likewise will the monk - but he can increase his speed when needed.
--------------------
I guess my point is that high-level characters have strange powers, and this seems to be widely accepted when it comes to spellcasters, psions, and other with strong and flashy supernatural powers. It's much less accepted when it comes to those with discrete supernatural powers.
Something that comes to mind is "Kill one man, you're a murderer. Kill a thousand men, you're a conqueror".
I find it interesting that everyone seems to be looking at changing the rules. Honestly character customization has been the name of the game since 3.0/3.5e. A monk can be exceedingly powerful, if used right. The answer to the Ac problem that I have found is to simply ignore it. The monk does what it's supposed to do, which is make your character do everything that makes you feel like Jet Li or a DBZ character. The easiest way to fix some of the problems mentioned here is to simple cross-class or apply a template. Notice that the change from 3.5 to Pathfinder removed a monks loss of abilities when changing alignment or cross-classing, so take a level of something else to balance your individual characters. This can also add to the balance of your character backstory or personality as well. On the other hand I myself like to apply templates to a monk. A lycanthrope gains AC bonus' from Natural Armor, and a DR to boot. A werebear is a LG species to begin with, or if you want to be an elf the Lythari werewolf variant from forgotten realms is viable. Then again it's good to remember that some feats increase your healing abilites, and monks already gain the ability to heal themselves. Other feats allow for the unarmed damage of a monk to count as Slashing, Piercing, etc. instead of Bludgeoning as well. I will admit that Monks are not really made for combat at lower levels, but then again it is also good to remember that at 4th level with your spellcaster really only able to cast a short list of especially damaging spells yet, and your Fighter/Barbarian/Paladin possibly not able to afford a magic weapon, your Monk may be the hero of the party when a demon shows up. the only change I would really stand behind is changing the monks Ki fist(magic) back to a permanent addition instead of the pathfinder change to being based off the Ki Pool ability.
I find it interesting that everyone seems to be looking at changing the rules. Honestly character customization has been the name of the game since 3.0/3.5e.
I agree. The rules are what they are. Best to make the best of them.
I think the Monk has some nice raw potential and some nice RAW potential.
However, I don't think making a good Monk is going to be as straightforward as some other classes.
Optimization is going to be key.
There are some positive changes from 3.5 - I think a careful weighing of advantage/disadvantage is important in ability selection.
I've seen WAY too many Monks who prioritize Dex and Wis, get a great AC - and run around trying to get monsters to attack them (and yes, I DON'T think a monster concentrating on the deadly characters is metagaming)
I think AC needs to be a secondary pursuit. The problem with Monks is a damage/To hit problem, and that needs to be considered from the moment you pick the class.
Race, Abilities, Feats - in the back of your head you need to be thinking, "How is this going to improve my offense?"
Getting extra attacks per round can be a nice offense boost if you can hit with them and do decent damage. One thing I notice off the bat is that although Flurry of Blows works much like TWF - you get full Str for all attacks. The optimizer inside me says, "Screw weapon finesse - pump Str"
The Monk I think is also going to rely a lot on buffing. Mage Armor alone is nearly a must. Barkskin too (especially since amulet of mighty fists and amulet of natural armor use the same slot).
Also the amulet of mighty fists doesn't require the "+1 minimum" enchantment - so you can go right for Holy, Shocking, Flaming - etc, if you can get reliable Greater Magic Fang.
If you can't - then maybe pay for Greater Magic Fang to be cast with Permanancy (That's just for MiB :) )
If you're depending on an unbuffed Monk to be your party's primary damage dealer, you may have picked Wisdom as your dump stat. ;)
By itself, the Monk strikes me as more of a harasser, who can get to and occupy those who can decimate your melee fighters at range. Dodge bonuses to AC all stack with each other, so a Monk with the Dodge and Mobility feats can spend 1 point from his ki pool for another +4 Dodge bonus to AC at 5th level. Even with a 15-point buy set of stats, that can lead to a well-protected Monk (AC in the mid 20s) who can weave his way through a field of sword-wielding foes and get all up in the face of a cleric of wizard. Sure, a wizard on a Phantom Steed can get there too, but he has to think of his chance of being hit by ranged attacks.
Monks who build to Grapple, Stun, Trip, and Disarm will be of far more help to their party.
|
|
The speed is an incredible asset and something that no other class can really match....
So that leaves Clerics, Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Rogues and Barbarians (who actually begin the game faster than Monks)
So it seems to me, if focusing on speed is your plan, the Monk is a so-so choice at best. Purely middle of the road.
I don't think so. In meat and potatoes play, when the party is in the middle of combat it is nice to have someone who can get behind and threaten the enemy. While its nice that the rogue can pour out damage, the monk can make it to lots of enemies. Other classes can be faster, but it might take a few rounds for them to get there.
At level 6, the monk in our party has a speed of 50ft (which can jump to 70 using a ki pool point). This means he can tumble up to 25ft (35ft) without penalty. That is 10ft (20ft) longer than the rogue or 5ft (15ft) longer than a rogue with Boots of Striding and Sprining. As their speed increases, their ability to harass really increases.
Also, their numerous bonuses to their CMD make it very hard to use similar tactics against them. This helps them anchor enemies for any other members of the party. Its a good role.
If we're talking about speed again, yes they can. Not only can they match it, they can do it better.
Sorry, not seeing it. I've seen monks flip through combat and get to places that others would like to reach but much quicker. They really go where they need to without having to stop and use a spell or quaff a potion, though I don't say other classes cannot.
I dunno. Look at Druids for example. They also get 3/4 BAB, d8 HD, the skills, speed to manuever in combat - they don't get evasion - but being a full caster on top of everything is a bit better than evasion I think. We haven't gotten into the animal companion yet either.Also, I think offensively, Druids have an edge in doing damage.
A monk is not meant to be a druid, however. Your comparing their niche to a class they are nothing like. Comparing them is non-sequitor, IMO.
I certainly agree with that. I'm also not convinced the Monk is a bad class (I haven't played with builds or anything)However- saying they are a good class because of "speed" is not going to take you very far.
Okay, very funy joke there :P I'm not so sure, though. Play around with some builds, check them out in a campaign. You'll start to see what I mean over the course of a campaign, not just a singular fight.
However, when a rogue harasses you, he rips your head off with one hit. SA damage is a huge offensive boost. Is the Monk getting anything to compare?
No, but then neither does the bard, ranger, or any other character who harasses. However, the ability to stun opponents, reduce their speed, make extra attacks, pin enemies down with high CMD... they're not as bad as people think they are.
Seriously, give the class a try before you judge it. You just have to figure out the niche, and its not a clone of any other class. It really does its own thing and in a strong way.
|
|
If you're depending on an unbuffed Monk to be your party's primary damage dealer, you may have picked Wisdom as your dump stat. ;)
This is true of almost every character. You have to get buffed in many cases to understand just how powerful your class can be. The monk too.
Monks who build to Grapple, Stun, Trip, and Disarm will be of far more help to their party.
Heck, just their high CMD can pin down those who underestimate the monk.
|
|
Heck, just their high CMD can pin down those who underestimate the monk.what
How on earth is a monk's CMD going to pin down anything with an int higher than 2?
Many use acrobatics to try to move through combat. It now works against CMD, which prevents acrobatic opponents from being able to move without provoking and AoO. Its all about positioning, which is what the monk is good at doing.
|
|
So they take a 5' step away and do whatever ranged thing they were planning to do, or simply eat the monk's deliciously tender organs. Even with Step-Up all the monk is doing is forcing a defensive cast.
Monks don't get reach or any sort of useful ability to pin foes down other than Stunning Fist.
I geuss monks are always fighting mages then and no one else? Acrobatics gets taken more and more since it boosts fighting defensively in the absence of a Combat Expertise feat that is really useful.
This works especially well on large encounters, but if they have to fight mages exclusively... that is why they have all good saves and evasion. They're a frustrating sort too, since little affects them. Its hard to bog down a monk or even knock him out in a single hit. This frustrates spellcasters and helps pin down mobile opponents.
This makes them awesome team players. Its not a role I see many people even think about on ANY gaming boards, but its part of what the monk is meant to be and do.
Edit: And sorry, seem to have caught you in the middle of edits!
|
|
The speed is an incredible asset and something that no other class can really match....
So that leaves Clerics, Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Rogues and Barbarians (who actually begin the game faster than Monks)
So it seems to me, if focusing on speed is your plan, the Monk is a so-so choice at best. Purely middle of the road.
I don't think so. In meat and potatoes play, when the party is in the middle of combat it is nice to have someone who can get behind and threaten the enemy. While its nice that the rogue can pour out damage, the monk can make it to lots of enemies. Other classes can be faster, but it might take a few rounds for them to get there.
At level 6, the monk in our party has a speed of 50ft (which can jump to 70 using a ki pool point). This means he can tumble up to 25ft (35ft) without penalty. That is 10ft (20ft) longer than the rogue or 5ft (15ft) longer than a rogue with Boots of Striding and Sprining. As their speed increases, their ability to harass really increases.
Also, their numerous bonuses to their CMD make it very hard to use similar tactics against them. This helps them anchor enemies for any other members of the party. Its a good role.
If we're talking about speed again, yes they can. Not only can they match it, they can do it better.Sorry, not seeing it. I've seen monks flip through combat and get to places that others would like to reach but much quicker. They really go where they need to without having to stop and use a spell or quaff a potion, though I don't say other classes cannot.
A monk is not meant to...
I dunno. Look at Druids for example. They also get 3/4 BAB, d8 HD, the skills, speed to manuever in combat - they don't get evasion - but being a full caster on top of everything is a bit better than evasion I think. We haven't gotten into the animal companion yet either.Also, I think offensively, Druids have an edge in doing damage.
Also one thing to note, the other classes usually have to spend an action to be able to move faster. Druids need to cast spells or wildshape, wizards and other spellcasters need to cast a spell.... the monk doesn't need to do that. In one round he can run up to an enemy and attack, or run away and do something else with his standard action. All the other classes need something else to be able to move as fast as the monk (with the exception of the barbarian but his fast movement isn't as strong as the monk's).
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Many use acrobatics to try to move through combat. It now works against CMD, which prevents acrobatic opponents from being able to move without provoking and AoO.I had forgotten that PF nerfed tumble to hell and gone for no good reason.
So they take a 5' step away and do whatever ranged thing they were planning to do, or simply eat the monk's deliciously tender organs. Even with Step-Up all the monk is doing is forcing a defensive cast. Monks don't get reach or any sort of useful ability to pin foes down other than Stunning Fist.
If a monk forces the enemy spellcaster to cast defensively every round, that's a huge win. With the new rules for casting defensively, the caster either drops to lower level spells, or starts failing some concentration checks.
You do mention a good point though - step up is a vital feat for monks.
|
The biggest problem the monk in our group has is Damage Reduction. Getting a ton of attacks that can't bypass DR is brutal. Allowing them to get some ability to bypass some DR would help a lot. The other issue is pricing on the amulet of mighty fists. The amulet is much more expensive than a comparable magic weapon and the amulet does not allow bypassing various DRs.
The above suggestion of gauntlets would help. Our GM let the monk in our group buy silver fist wraps to bypass the Silver DR.
Swap the lvl 10, Adamant bypass for the standard magic plus overcomes DR mechanic with +1 = 4th, +2 at 8th etc. Uses an existing standard mechanic and scales the Monk DR bypass nicely.
If you want to beef up some monsters with 3.0 style magic+ DR, it works nicely with that too.
No problem with special wraps either.
Well, I think that if we want the problem with DR somehow fixed, then it would be good to consider the monk to have +1 bonus provided by his ki strike for every 3 monk levels for the purposes of overcomming DR... or every 4 levles with the ability to throw in more for for burning ki points.
Leave adamantine in place. Breaking things with bare hands is very iconic for easzern style martial artists.
I was privy to the character comparison of a 20 Monk and 20 Fighter focused on a one-handed weapon and shield style of fighting. I unfortunately don't have the numbers on me, but the Monk ended up about 10 to 15 points higher on AC and had a better chance to hit the Fighter. I think the Monk was 18 to 20 to hit and the Fighter was only on 20s to hit the Monk. The conclusion was that the Monk gets crazy good once access to higher level magic items was permitted.
Sword and board fighters aren't even the bottom of the barrel of high-level DnD characters. They are straight-up not playable. Although I still heavily doubt that a monk can outmatch one of them in AC and to hit, assuming equal levels of optimization and points. (In damage easily, although not in PF).
Anyway, answering to the original question: I'm not even sure how you can make monks viable without a complete rewrite. My own houserules gave them full BAB, more AC, more unarmed damage, way more inherent and selectable special abilities, including unlimited Stunning Fist-equivalents and channeling them through weapons. Experience of running a campaign demonstrated, that they still fail at life. I was forced to jump through the hoops and resort to antithematic exploits to make monk NPCs that do not suck and can go, say, into Rise of Runelords (assuming that enemies fight like they want to win) without being insta-squashed. MAD and expensive equipment hurt them too much. You cannot keep both their damage output and their offensive special abilitites relevant. And their AC/HP are inadequate no matter what you do. Monsters crush them. "Harassing" or "skirmishing" is not worth anything, when almost all ranged attackers that matter either outmelee monks (monsters with good ranged abilities and bad melee are very rare; the reverse is very common, though), do not allow him to get close (anything that flies or drops BC spells doesn't care about monk's speed very much) or can reduce his damage output to ignorable values (anything that attacks as a standard action, i.e. casters and many monsters will not allow him to full attack). An occasional archer is not worth thinking about. There are whole adventure paths without a single dedicated archer in them.
Players not trying to use them as fighters goes a long way. You try and be a front line fighter with a class that was never meant to do that and more often then not you die.
The only things they really can do is trading full attacks. (Flurry is incompatible with movement, and by the time they get a real edge in land speed it is not good for much anyway, because every enemy of note that does not eats monks for breakfast in melee can fly or throw battlefield control.) It stands to reason that people use them for trading full attacks. Too bad, that even lowly fighters usually can outfullattack them.
the issue is hitting and full attacking the right target, you aim at the heavy armored target, or the one with the most HP, or what have you and stand there trading blows every round, your not gonna last long. Sure you can do it, but your built to be a harasser, hit the caster, keep him from casting, on the defensive, you hit the weaker foes, damage here and there, run off, make yourself a battlefield menace, you harass you hit and run, you make it hard as hell for a foe to get around you, you trip, you disarm. You do not stand round after round and trade blows. You are not a fighter you can hurt someone , alot if need be, but your not meant to stand there trading blows. The can take some hits, but they are not fighters, they are not built to soak up damage.
|
|
the issue is hitting and full attacking the right target, you aim at the heavy armored target, or the one with the most HP, or what have you and stand there trading blows every round, your not gonna last long. Sure you can do it, but your built to be a harasser, hit the caster, keep him from casting, on the defensive, you hit the weaker foes, damage here and there, run off, make yourself a battlefield menace, you harass you hit and run, you make it hard as hell for a foe to get around you, you trip, you disarm. You do not stand round after round and trade blows. You are not a fighter you can hurt someone , alot if need be, but your not meant to stand there trading blows. The can take some hits, but they are not fighters, they are not built to soak up damage.
In which case, flurry needs to be looked at as it is a major class feature running counter to that strategy.
Edit: As a suggestion, an option to replace flurry with a Vital Strike chain that uses full BAB and automatically upgrades. That would fit with the harrasser role.
not really, you hit and run, you hit em enough, you stop and have a good chance of dropping them with a FoB. Like all tactical options you have to choose when it's best to use it. You can't full attack with a fighter or a Rogue every round. Some time it's best not to.
Your full attack is most time better then the fighter's, you have more hits that land, do pretty good damage and have the ablity to get into place to use it.
If you full attacking the first thing you can reach, thats not a great ideal, much like a fighter full attacking the weakest foe. You can do it sure, but again thats not the best thing for you to be doing, and you should not be alarmed anymore the the rogue that stands trading blows with his foe that your not all that great at soaking up damage.
|
|
Sword and board fighters aren't even the bottom of the barrel of high-level DnD characters. They are straight-up not playable. Although I still heavily doubt that a monk can outmatch one of them in AC and to hit, assuming equal levels of optimization and points. (In damage easily, although not in PF).Anyway, answering to the original question: I'm not even sure how you can make monks viable without a complete rewrite. My own houserules gave them full BAB, more AC, more unarmed damage, way more inherent and selectable special abilities, including unlimited Stunning Fist-equivalents and channeling them through weapons. Experience of running a campaign demonstrated, that they still fail at life. I was forced to jump through the hoops and resort to antithematic exploits to make monk NPCs that do not suck and can go, say, into Rise of Runelords (assuming that enemies fight like they want to win) without being insta-squashed. MAD and expensive equipment hurt them too much. You cannot keep both their damage output and their offensive special abilitites relevant. And their AC/HP are inadequate no matter what you do. Monsters crush them. "Harassing" or "skirmishing" is not worth anything, when almost all ranged attackers that matter either outmelee monks (monsters with good ranged abilities and bad melee are very rare; the reverse is very common, though), do not allow him to get close (anything that flies or drops BC spells doesn't care about monk's speed very much) or can reduce his damage output to ignorable values...
Now this I really don't understand. How come every class debate degenerates into an argument that this class or that class is unplayable, or not as good as another, because his AC or damage output (however optimized) aren't on par with the wizard or fighter (to name an example).
If you pick a monk and expect to play it like a tank (like so many have pointed out here) then of course you're going to be disappointed and frustrated. If you want to play a tank, then pick an appropriate class (e.g. fighter) and build him that way.
However, I think it's perfectly viable to play a monk with very high AC and damage output. For one you can always utilize potions of mage armor and shield to up your AC by +8, and assuming you have decent wisdom and dex scores you could range from AC 24 at first lvl (assuming you have +3 in wisdom and dex) to above 30 at around 10th lvl.
As for damage output you can with the right feats come close to a fighter, especially if you have a decent strength score. However, if you want to compare a monk to a greatsword wielding fighter (to name an example) well then of course the fighter is going to win the damage contest.
But really, that's what this always boils down to it seems to me. A contest about who deals the most damage when in fact I would assume most people play the game to share a really cool story. Parts of that would include allowing other players shine in their respective roles and that means if you're playing a monk and you're constantly outclasses when it comes to damage and AC by the resident fighter, well then... that's what's usually supposed to happen right?
EDIT: Also, what you as a monk excels at is tripping, disarming, stunning... effectively putting lots of different conditions on enemies that hamper their attacks (and retreats).
By itself, the Monk strikes me as more of a harasser, who can get to and occupy those who can decimate your melee fighters at range.As opposed to the other classes, who can get to and kill those who can decimate, etc. Nevermind that many fights just won't have soft targets for the monk to occupy.
Other classes have finite resources they have to use to achieve this, or have to use ranged attacks themselves, or both. And a target doesn't have to be 'soft' for a monk to effectively deal with it.
Not only do monks not do this well (in either the "as well as or better than other classes" sense or the "effective against level-appropriate challenges" sense) but it's not a role that every fight will necessarily include. When you're fighting fire giants, having no abilities other than "hit a dude" and defenses that get you turned into hellhound chow does not make for a well-designed class.
Well by that logic anyone who relies on armor for their defenses will be turned into hatchling chow when fighting Bebiliths, while the Monk with no armor to worry about and all high saves will dance around it and hit it until it dies. Cherry picking enemies and using that to justify a belief in a class's overall weakness won't get you far.
the issue is hitting and full attacking the right target, you aim at the heavy armored target, or the one with the most HP, or what have you and stand there trading blows every round, your not gonna last long. Sure you can do it, but your built to be a harasser, hit the caster, keep him from casting, on the defensive,
The only way to keep a semi-competent caster from casting is to make him die or disable him with your first hard-earned hit. Barring that, take so much HPs, that he switches from attacking to self-preservation. 3.X monk can do this, sort of, with enough optimization, pure PF monk can't.
Besides that, where people ever take the ridiculous notion that the monk is meant to be a harasser, particularly a harrasser of casters? His already-bad damage output goes down the drain once he starts moving more than 5' per round. He has no special in-built tools to penetrate typical caster ways to defend themselves (flight, BC, invisibility, miss chances, heck, even high AC).
you hit the weaker foes, damage here and there, run off, make yourself a battlefield menace, you harass you hit and run, you make it hard as hell for a foe to get around you, you trip, you disarm.
In other word, you do nothing that can possibly matter (either because enemies don't care anyway - monk's single attack after movement or AoO, disarm; or because the chance is way low - trip), while enemies kill your party's asses. (Again, in 3.X you can theoretically alleviate some of your problems, by dumpster-diving through supplements, not so in PF).
You are not a fighter you can hurt someone , alot if need be, but your not meant to stand there trading blows. The can take some hits, but they are not fighters, they are not built to soak up damage.
No melee class can "soak up" damage from proper-CR monsters, never mind boss monsters with CR > party level. Neither in 3.X, nor in PF. Either the damage output is exorbitant and you cannot safely take more than one full attack, or there are "screw you" on-hit effects, that make depending on your HPs a bad idea. This only changes if party fights lots and lots of mooks and is smart enough to not let them gangbang one PC.
fixing monks is super easy.
Zen Master Bonus (Ex)
When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds his Wisdom bonus (if any) to his AC, CMD, and attack rolls with unarmed strike. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC, CMD, and unarmed strike attack rolls at 4th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every four monk levels thereafter, up to a maximum of +5 at 20th level.
The bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. He loses both attack and defense bonuses when he is immobilized or helpless, when he wears any armor, when he carries a shield, or when he carries a medium or heavy load.
I would add CMB to the things the Zen Master Bonus should affect.
Zen Acrobatics (Ex)
At 5th level, a monk adds his level to all Acrobatics checks. In addition, he always counts as having a running start when making jump checks using Acrobatics. By spending 1 point from his ki pool as a swift action, a monk gains a +20 bonus on all Acrobatics checks for 1 round.
Fixed!
This is called High Jump, is it not?
the issue is hitting and full attacking the right target, you aim at the heavy armored target, or the one with the most HP, or what have you and stand there trading blows every round, your not gonna last long. Sure you can do it, but your built to be a harasser, hit the caster, keep him from casting, on the defensive,The only way to keep a semi-competent caster from casting is to make him die or disable him with your first hard-earned hit. Barring that, take so much HPs, that he switches from attacking to self-preservation. 3.X monk can do this, sort of, with enough optimization, pure PF monk can't.
I'll take my chances with a Monk's Stunning Fist against a wizard's fortitude save. Stunned enemies can't cast spells. Against clerics who presumably need to hold a holy symbol to cast most spells, disarming them of it kind of ruins their day too.
Besides that, where people ever take the ridiculous notion that the monk is meant to be a harasser, particularly a harrasser of casters? His already-bad damage output goes down the drain once he starts moving more than 5' per round. He has no special in-built tools to penetrate typical caster ways to defend themselves (flight, BC, invisibility, miss chances, heck, even high AC).
Someone casting spells to avoid the monk isn't casting spells that will hurt the party.
But really, that's what this always boils down to it seems to me. A contest about who deals the most damage when in fact I would assume most people play the game to share a really cool story. Parts of that would include allowing other players shine in their respective roles and that means if you're playing a monk and you're constantly outclasses when it comes to damage and AC by the resident fighter, well then... that's what's usually supposed to happen right?
So, you basically tell us, that monks are supposed to suck? A question for you: how in Nine Hells arbitrarily-imposed suckage improves that your "really cool story" in any way, shape or form?
EDIT: Also, what you as a monk excels at is tripping, disarming, stunning... effectively putting lots of different conditions on enemies that hamper their attacks (and retreats).
Monk does not excel in stunning. Because he needs to approach, and then he needs to hit, and then he needs to target the most common good save (and he still has MAD, so his DC is likely to be subpar), and then he does not even take the target out of combat entirely if he succeeds. Neither he does excel in tripping. Because he has MAD, and because tripping is only good for a dedicated build for which he does not qualify. And because it's nerfed to Abyss in PF anyway. The same applies to his chances at disarm, except disarm never was good to begin with. Most opponents you should fear above low levels don't even carry weapons.
By the way, it seems that most monk defenders here operate on the assumption that humanoid NPCs are the most common opponents by a very large margin. This is not true for majority the published adventures. Very much not true, if we discount minor encounters with mooks, that pose no to very little actual threat.
|
|
What foe other than a spellcaster or archer is going to run away from a monk?
Who says they're running from a monk? What about moving past them, what about when they're trying to defend their allies? What about the enemy monk against the party who batters your mage, rouge, and cleric?
There is more than one way for the monk to excel, and your only thinking of one instance. Think broader; how many times per different situation does the monk have an ability that can do the job? They're versatile and good at controlling the flow of combat around them. That is incredibly good.
You keep saying it "frustrates spellcasters and helps pin down mobile opponents," but there are three kinds of attack routines: melee, ranged, and spellcasting. If the foe is melee, they eat the monk alive because it's not very tough. If the foe is ranged, then the monk has a slight advantage if the foe has no melee attacks and the monk has Step-Up. If the foe is a spellcaster, then the monk forces a 5' step or a defensive cast.
A monk can avoid the melee combatant with his superior speed, cutting down the number of attacks they can potentially get. They can deflect the arrows of the ranged combatant or close on him incredibly quickly. The spellcaster is stunned, provoking AoO, or casting minor spells that the monk will save against with his high saves. The monk doesn't even need step up, he just needs a wall... hence he works well in a party structure alongside a fighter, rouge, or the cleric. Like I said before, they're beautiful in a party! You gotta think about their role... which is not 1-on-1.
If the monk was somehow a threat to any of the three of these, sure, that'd be harassment. But right now it's the weakest melee class and has no additional offensive ability other than Stunning Fist.
This is only your opinion, and I don't see anything that really backs it up. I clearly see things very differently, and have had experience both playing, running monks as enemies, and GMing in groups containing monks. They're a good class.
Also, we're still at the point where not every fight has a completely melee-incapable foe who politely stands on the ground within reach of the monk.
No, you keep deciding to change the flow of the argument to something else that has nothing to do with the last argument. You say Melee, I give an answer... so you say ranged, I give an answer... so you say spellcaster and again there is an answer. I think we've gone through all of your types of combat as you described above.
The monk will dance around and get eaten to death. The bebilith does more damage, has more HP, has a better chance to hit, and has humongous reach. Really, you picked that woodchipper instead of a fire giant?
We're still at the point where people are saying "The monk is super awesome against soft targets." Even if that's true (and it's not), what happens when the party is just fighting brutes? Does the monk stand in the back and throw shuriken?
No, they do their job. They team up with the rouge, fighter, and whoever else. They help pin down the foe for the wizard to blow apart... and they survive accidentally being the in the way of the wizards firepower with high saves and evasion.
This thread was initially about fixing the monk. The problem with the monk is not just that it cannot do much of anything effectively, but also that what it does isn't something that is always necessary. Its specialty is very situational and completely replaceable by nearly any class. That's not a good design from square one.
Well, Nothing is necessary. A fighter isn't necessary, neither is a wizard, rogue, cleric, druid, cavalier, summoner,... you name it. They do a job that they are good at. This isn't a video game, after all.
I'll take my chances with a Monk's Stunning Fist against a wizard's fortitude save.
Be aware, that you chances start to suck very quickly. If you don't believe me, check some adventure paths. By CR 10 spellcasters can have up to Fort +13. (And in my personal play experience, 3.X wizards easily cranked their Fort even higher than their Will, at least for low-medium levels; don't know about PF, though.)
Stunned enemies can't cast spells. Against clerics who presumably need to hold a holy symbol to cast most spells, disarming them of it kind of ruins their day too.
Many combat spells, including curative ones, don't require DF. And a cleric can easily wreck monk's stuff in melee. In fact, majority of competent clerics bash heads in melee after a combat begins.
Someone casting spells to avoid the monk isn't casting spells that will hurt the party.
Ever heard about "pre-buffing"?
Well by that logic anyone who relies on armor for their defenses will be turned into hatchling chow when fighting Bebiliths, while the Monk with no armor to worry about and all high saves will dance around it and hit it until it dies. Cherry picking enemies and using that to justify a belief in a class's overall weakness won't get you far.The monk will dance around and get eaten to death. The bebilith does more damage, has more HP, has a better chance to hit, and has humongous reach. Really, you picked that woodchipper instead of a fire giant?
I sure did. The Monk will have a ridiculously high AC (right around 30) while moving through the Bebelith's threatened spaces that no amount of Armor Dismantling will change. While the Rogue and Wizard fail their Fortitude saves against the Bebelith's bite and the fighter and cleric get entangled in its web attacks and get their armor destroyed due to lower Reflex saves, the monk will remain largely unaffected. And a 22 AC is child's play for a 10th level Monk to hit, though its DR will slow him down a little.
Clearly this proves that the Wizard, Rogue, Fighter, and Cleric are all worthless classes.
We're still at the point where people are saying "The monk is super awesome against soft targets." Even if that's true (and it's not), what happens when the party is just fighting brutes? Does the monk stand in the back and throw shuriken?
Disarm them. Disarming someone with an unarmed attack lets you automatically pick up whatever they dropped. Throw whatever they held as far away as you can, or run off with it laughing as they try to keep up.
Be aware, that you chances start to suck very quickly. If you don't believe me, check some adventure paths. By CR 10 spellcasters can have up to Fort +13. (And in my personal play experience, 3.X wizards easily cranked their Fort even higher than their Will, at least for low-medium levels; don't know about PF, though.)
I'll take my chances with a Monk's Stunning Fist against a wizard's fortitude save.
By level 10 a well built Monk can perform a Stunning Fist attack 10 times a day or more, and they can use a FoB while doing it. So I remain confident.
Stunned enemies can't cast spells. Against clerics who presumably need to hold a holy symbol to cast most spells, disarming them of it kind of ruins their day too.Many combat spells, including curative ones, don't require DF. And a cleric can easily wreck monk's stuff in melee. In fact, majority of competent clerics bash heads in melee after a combat begins.
You're limited to Cure/Inflict Wounds, and spells that rely on the monk failing a saving throw. As for just attacking, they'll still have a pretty high AC to deal with, assuming the monk doesn't just take their weapon away next. A monk who builds to disarm foes is downright annoying.
Someone casting spells to avoid the monk isn't casting spells that will hurt the party.Ever heard about "pre-buffing"?
Are we assuming a battle in which the monk allows the cleric all the time in the world to buff up, or one in which the monk and cleric see each other at the same time and the monk is standing next to him in one round or so?
|
|
So, you basically tell us, that monks are supposed to suck? A question for you: how in Nine Hells arbitrarily-imposed suckage improves that your "really cool story" in any way, shape or form?
No that's not what I said. But you seem to be operating under the assumption that the game is solely about a pissing contest between the classes (in this case the monk and fighter) when really it's a lot more than that. If you want to play that way fine, house-rule the monk to bits and enjoy yourself. Or don't play the monk.
Also my definition of a "really cool story" includes co-operative story telling, which means that I won't engage in a pissing contest with the other players because I'm playing a class that's ill-fitted for a certain role (as in playing a monk as a tank).
Monk does not excel in stunning. Because he needs to approach, and then he needs to hit, and then he needs to target the most common good save (and he still has MAD, so his DC is likely to be subpar), and then he does not even take the target out of combat entirely if he succeeds. Neither he does excel in tripping. Because he has MAD, and because tripping is only good for a dedicated build for which he does not qualify. And because it's nerfed to Abyss in PF anyway. The same applies to his chances at disarm, except disarm never was good to begin with. Most opponents you should fear above low levels don't even carry weapons.By the way, it seems that most monk defenders here operate on the assumption that humanoid NPCs are the most common opponents by a very large margin. This is not true for majority the published adventures. Very much not true, if we discount minor encounters with mooks, that pose no to very little actual threat.
Yes the monk does excel at stunning. He gets class specific improvements on the feat, right? Therefore he excels at stunning. Now you might feel that stunning isn't a good feat all together but that doesn't mean that the monk doesn't excel at it.
AC 22 childsplay? Hmmm, while flurrying the monk's got an attack bonus of +8 before modifiers (and don't even expect stunning fist to work, the Bebilith would save the majority of the time), so lets assume he has a +6 on his attack stat (totally reasonable, infact possibly a bit high considering the average points available and the AC you expect to have). That means he's got a 60% chance of hitting on each of his first rank attacks, and 35% with the third. It's a reasonable comparison, but hardly childsplay.
I am envisioning a Monk who takes Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (Unarmed), and Weapon Finesse (Unarmed) combined with a 16 Dex, so that does give a +14/+14/+9/+9 FoB progression. One might also reasonably assume the monk to either have items to increase his chance to hit, or buffs from a friendly source, and would certainly be able to move into a flanking position.