So I just started pathfinder with a monk and got him to 2nd level and started thinking, would it be worth it to take a rogue level, or 3?
I would get the sneak attack damage anytime I flanked, which would work nicely at low levels but may not be as efficient at higher levels. 2D6 extra @ lvl 5 is great but 2D6 etra @ 18 isn't that big a deal I guess.
Not only would I get extra damage but I would also gain a bunch of skill points to spend. Trapfinding and trapsense would be minor pros. A rogue talent could be very useful.
Any thoughts?
What's your character's Strength score? If it's crappy, you need something to boost damage, and a rogue dip can do that.
What's your character's Strength score? If it's crappy, you need something to boost damage, and a rogue dip can do that.
I went with weapon finesse so my str mod is +2.
I guess my biggest question is am I going to regret taking some rogue levels and not reaching the highest monk levels.
I'm not that worried about how much damage I can do, I'm more worried about where that damage is placed or on who. Going for a tactical approach is more my intent. Acrobating past everybody and grappling that wizard in the back would be cool.
Keep in mind that your 2d6 extra sneak attack stacks extremely well with monk, who get the most number of attacks. So long as you take at least 16 levels of monk, you'll end up with 7 attacks (before magics) by the end of your career. Half of those attacks have huge negatives to hit, but 14d6 possible extra damage is MUCH more than 2d6.
You'd be delaying a few neat abilities like the ability to self heal and spell resistance (both of which would also be weaker). Higher tier abilities can mostly be simulated with magic items and/or spells.
Then there's the monk's "signature" ability, if he were to have a single one. Quivering palm. Once a day, if you succeed on an attack role, you can force a save or die. OR you can do 2d6 extra damage almost EVERY time you hit something. Not to mention a number of low level rogue talents that stay useful up through 20.
The monk's main contribution to a fight is being able to hit a LOT. Why not up the damage on nearly every blow? For the cost of .... very little, really.
I went with weapon finesse so my str mod is +2.
Not crappy, but a damage boost wouldn't hurt.
I guess my biggest question is am I going to regret taking some rogue levels and not reaching the highest monk levels.
You will, absolutely. This is the cost of multiclassing.
Not to say it won't be worth it though.
If you do multiclass, I would recommend 3 levels for a 2d6 sneak attack boost.
However, your Str isn't bad, so I wouldn't say that the multiclass is required by any means.
You will find those skill points don't go far - especially when you can't increase those skills later on.
For the talent, I would recommend Bleeding Attack, which is going to synergize nicely with Flurry of Blows.
Also - do you use Shurken? If not, I would pick some up. Definitely a nice beginning of combat flurry of blows action when you are adding sneak attack to each one.
I'm not that worried about how much damage I can do,
You should. When you fight opponents with DR a Monk can easily end up doing NO damage at all unless they've planned otherwise.
Going for a tactical approach is more my intent.
It's not an either/or choice. Be tactical AND consider your damage.
Acrobating past everybody and grappling that wizard in the back would be cool.
Then that's a point against Rogue. Rogue will drop your CMB.
It will drop your CMB. It seems you are focusing on Dexterity, which is a good way to optimize your CMB/CMD. It might be worth it drop your CMB by 3 over time, as you get that sneak attack damage on pinned opponents and any time you flank. But if you don't want to very bad at combat maneuvers in the short term, take those rogue levels and space them out, maybe once every 3-4 monk levels. If you have improved grapple, the bonus it provides should help cover you.
The only other thing is your monk damage, monk speed, monk AC, and monk powers all take a hit, and maybe one that might bother you over time. Monks are highly level dependent, which is probably why they took the multiclassing penalty off of monks as it was its own deterrent.
|
When dealing with multi-classing a 3/4th Bab class, the rule is to generally go in increments of 4. The logic is if you go 3 levels of rogue, your bab dips by one every 4 levels. For instance, a rogue 4/monk 4 has BAB of 6 (7 during flurry only). A rogue 3/monk 5 has a BAB of 5 (7 when flurried). This hurts for progression.
With that said, you're actually hurting your overall damage ratios; your monk flurryinf extra attacks and feat availabilities are based directly on monk levels. You can argue the opposite (a 2 level monk dip can make an awesome high-level combat Druid, for instance).
Monks are difficult in general, but you can get pretty good with them, as long as you use a quaterstaff instead of your fists (enchantable, and doesn't eat your important neck slot) and as Treant says, keep your strength high (their best class feature is a two-weapon fighter with full str damage on all attacks; you have to make the most of that).
I don't want to drop my CMB or D at all. Taking some rogues levels will drop those as well as fort and will saves. That's a big reason not to take any rogue lvls that I didn't think about.
I have improved grapple now, it seemed to fit the flavor of my character, later I might take disarm as well. Taking weapons away from fighter types sounds like a lot of fun. Or even staffs or wands from magic types.
I've never played a monk in any other game system because I've always heard that they didn't perform well. I play one now to make up my own mind. So far so good.
Another noob question for someone. I have a MW quarterstaff and just reached level 2, can I make 3 FoB attacks because it's a double weapon? And this attack is made at the same attack bonus as the other attacks, right?
So there is no reason to take a double weapon then, except for non FoB attacks. If I move and attack, I will get two attacks right?
Is there a monk build guide somewhere that has been posted that I can read? I've looked but haven't found any. Treantmonk has done some great work with other classes, as well as others, but I don't think a monk version has been posted yet.
Does anyone actually play a monk with any success? I get the feeling I should've gone with my other character as my main, a twangy ranger. I have been hearing nothing but negatives so far (just like AD&D), high # of attacks but low damage, expensive to equip even though they don't wear armor, the higher the level the farther they fall behind other classes, etc.
I read the post about the positive aspects of a monk that seemed to turn into a monk bashfest. Seems popular, to bash a monk I mean. Maybe monks aren't different enough from other classes to really standout on their own.
Any advise from anyone is absolutly welcome and appreciated. I refuse to give up on my monk!.....yet
|
First off, I will say that I have enjoyed playing monks (my latest was during PFRPG Beta - Adso In JollyDoc's RotRL campaign). Second, I will say that if you're looking to play an uber-optimized character, then you've got the wrong class. A straight monk is fun as hell to play because they have so many options for many different situations. You can tumble, grapple, trip, and disarm better than any other class in the game if you build your character that way. Now, you're not going to be the primary damage-dealer or anything, but from a tactical perspective the possibilities are vast.
While I enjoy Treantmonk's opt guides, I'm not going to do that here. My monk had Str as his primary stat, then Wis, then Dex/Con. An amulet of holy fists was great, as was the monk's robe. It's worth investing in a wand of enlarge person to give to one of the party casters to have your own personal buff-stick. You not only get the +2 Str boost, but your unarmed strike damage increases as well (see p58) and your CMB goes up. Also, silenced, invisible monks are nasty, nasty. One thing that is not strictly legal core, but that you might get a sympathetic DM to work with you on, is to take the Disruptive feat. You're already going wreak havoc on spellcasters and this fits right into the build.
I enjoyed playing a monk simply because of the many options available in a given situation, and the fact that it allowed me to be creative and to influence combats in so many ways. Stick with it, and have fun!
Is there a monk build guide somewhere that has been posted that I can read? I've looked but haven't found any. Treantmonk has done some great work with other classes, as well as others, but I don't think a monk version has been posted yet.
Does anyone actually play a monk with any success? I get the feeling I should've gone with my other character as my main, a twangy ranger. I have been hearing nothing but negatives so far (just like AD&D), high # of attacks but low damage, expensive to equip even though they don't wear armor, the higher the level the farther they fall behind other classes, etc.
I read the post about the positive aspects of a monk that seemed to turn into a monk bashfest. Seems popular, to bash a monk I mean. Maybe monks aren't different enough from other classes to really standout on their own.
Any advise from anyone is absolutly welcome and appreciated. I refuse to give up on my monk!.....yet
treantmonk is working on guide, as I understand it, as is angryscrub. Monks are getting a bad wrap because people want them to be as damaging as fighters, while also being able to do a lot of other stuff. They don't understand, IMHO, that there is a trade off, and sometimes this leads to monks not performing as well as one expects jet li or jackie chan would. Its a matter of expectations vs reality.
Monks are ability dependent, one of those abilities is not a traditional "combat" stat, a la Wisdom. Their damage also comes in the form of lots of attacks, which makes them very strength dependent. This pulls them in 2 directions, sort of.
if you pump up a monk's strength, he hits like a fighter, and does fighter damage. But this steals resources from his wisdom and effectively gives him a lower DC on stuns, less ki points, less of an AC/CMD at higher levels. These are the monks of players who say monk defenses are too weak. They are performing offensively well but getting hit and taking more damage than a fighter in magically enchanted heavy armor, with a heap of more HP (really just 20% more).
If you pump up the monk's wisdom, he has plenty of ki, his stunning attacks are as hard to resist as a same level wizard spell, he can't be grappled by the balor, etc. BUT his damage suffers. He has the strength of a bard or an archery ranger. Not bad, better than average, but not as great as a fighter's. He has less to-hit, which penalizes his attacks compared to a fighter. This wouldn't be that bad, except his contribution in combat is hit-based. He needs to hit with that stunning fist to stun. He needs to hit with his lower iterative attacks to add to his damage. He needs to do well with that combat maneuver if he wants to be "the combat maneuver master". In the end he does ok, BUT ironically not as good as the fighter who has also picked up improved grapple/sunder/disarm/trip. These are the monks of players that complain that the monk is not enough like a fighter, that his damage is gimped.
When treantmonk and angryscrub finish their guides I am gonna be excited to see them, and see how the various pros and cons line up.
|
|
I mean, they're not THAT ability dependent. They are strength primary, wisdom secondary, period. They will quickly want stat items for both of those slots, but even starting off doesn't have to be so bad.
Human
(15 point) (20 point) (25 point)
Str: 17 18 20
Wis: 15 (7 pt) 16 16
Int: 7 (Gain 4) 7 7
Dex: 15 (5) 14 13
Con: 12 (2) 14 12
Chr: 7 (Gain 4) 7 7
(Edited to fix numbers and make it more readable)
Fighting with a Quaterstaff. You lose a tiny bit of damage (1 point, then 2, eventually 3.5 at 12th level); but gain a neck slot, and can enchant it with keywords (thereby focusing up your damage). I think fighting with hands is a terrible monk mistake.
Feats: 1st Two Weapon Fighting Style (if it's truly ruled to give you the +2 back; that's effectively +2 to hit for all but your charge, which should be a combat manuever anyway)
Step Up (Human)
Combat Reflexes (Monk)
2nd: Improved Grapple (and you can default vs magic type round 1 to try to get them in and give them a noogie; you have heck of a good CM)
3rd: Power Attack.
And build up from there. At 3rd level you should have a +1 Quaterstaff, and be hitting at +7/+7 for d6+6/d6+6... which is more than the standard fighters +5/+5 to hit for 1d8+6/1d6+4 (2 handed sword and board) (and of course; you have the +9 grapple combat manuever option vs mages and clerics round 1). This build is set up to be a magic killer in case you didn't notice the feat trend line. Of course, said fighter should be sporting a WAY better AC (we're talking in the 25ish range level 3), compared to your piddling 19 (we'll assume a nice mage is going to mage armor you before battle), so you are the true definition of a glass cannon. I'll be interested to see how Treant and Angry are able to build to counteract this.
I'll be interested to see how Treant and Angry are able to build to counteract this.
Looks very close to what I'll be suggesting...although I've soured on the quarterstaff.
In order to take advantage of Stunning fist or Medusa's wrath you will need to have at least one hand free.
This means your best bet is to use 2 weapons (like the kama), drop one as a free action when needed for the above if playing an armed Monk.
disagree here. Despite the name, I don't see any reason stunning fist can't use your hip or knee or foot. Monk with a reach weapon, crossbow, or other two handed weapon can flurry with his feet without dropping what's in his handsI'll be interested to see how Treant and Angry are able to build to counteract this.Looks very close to what I'll be suggesting...although I've soured on the quarterstaff.
In order to take advantage of Stunning fist or Medusa's wrath you will need to have at least one hand free.
This means your best bet is to use 2 weapons (like the kama), drop one as a free action when needed for the above if playing an armed Monk.
You're right. My mistake. In fact, the Monk entry clearly states that unarmed strikes can be made with your hands full.
When I figured it out (working on guide right now) I raced back here hoping nobody had responded to my last post yet.
Crap.
Learning as I go here...
...
Feats: 1st Two Weapon Fighting Style (if it's truly ruled to give you the +2 back; that's effectively +2 to hit for all but your charge, which should be a combat manuever anyway)...
Why do you pick up two-weapon fight? Is it to pick up the later feats in the chain, like two weapon rend?
Why do you pick up two-weapon fight? Is it to pick up the later feats in the chain, like two weapon rend?...
Feats: 1st Two Weapon Fighting Style (if it's truly ruled to give you the +2 back; that's effectively +2 to hit for all but your charge, which should be a combat manuever anyway)...
I'm asking my self that too.
...
Feats: 1st Two Weapon Fighting Style (if it's truly ruled to give you the +2 back; that's effectively +2 to hit for all but your charge, which should be a combat manuever anyway)...
Why do you pick up two-weapon fight? Is it to pick up the later feats in the chain, like two weapon rend?
It looks like Thalin may be referring to a houserule - in no way should the two weapon fighting feat normally affect a flurry.
I also see little reason to wield two weapons - you can make all your flurry attacks with a single weapon. A quarterstaff is useful simply because you can use it two-handed and get Str * 1.5 (when not flurrying).
A Monk with just 14 dex/wis and potions of mage armor, shield of faith, owl's wisdom, and cat's grace would have an AC of 24, and it only goes up from there.
My very first 3.0 character started as rogue/monk (up to 3/2) - it works very nicely at low levels. If you stick with Monk (unlike me), you should do well.
It's true taking 4 levels would give you an equal base attack at all levels compared to monk - except when you flurry and when you do combat maneuvers. Since Monks actually *get* full base attack for flurry and CMB, the "take 4 levels advice" doesn't really apply so much.
That one level keeps your monk abilities chugging along (and you'll want your Spell Resistance and other abilities to be at max), but gives you a nice hit of sneak attack and trapfinding (Perception is already a monk skill anyhow), and a few more class skills. You already have evasion, you already have more tricks/talents than you know what to do with.
If you do take more, Bleeding Attack is actually about the worst one, since it doesn't stack with itself and 1-2 points of bleed will become less and less. I'd go with Free Stand myself.
Good luck - it's a fun fun road, regardless if you take one, three, four, or no rogue levels!
unfortunately I'm helping my fiancé's mom move her store to a new location this weekend, so no guide work for me. Postting from my iPhone actually. But last night I was playing around with the idea of a switch hitter monk similar to your ranger. Much harder of course, but there's some definite flexibility there.
My guide is basically done except for finishing touches.
I agree a Monk will end up switching attack types.
Pigeonholing Feats like Weapon Focus end up being luxuries that none of my experimental builds could afford.
I found using a melee weapon is often looking better at lower levels when affording enchantment is easier, or just by having the option of Masterwork. However, at later levels (once Monk's robe is in play and Amulet of Mighty Fists is available) Unarmed looks a lot better.
Of course, all Monks need to use some unarmed attacks with Stunning Fist and Medusa's Wrath.
However, I did find some options to make Shuriken pretty good. I think they're good for any Monk at lower levels, and if you focus a bit, they can be pretty effective at higher levels too. You draw them as a free action, and you get Str (and potentially deadly aim) to damage bonuses.
This to a large degree can reduce the big Monk drawback that movement+Standard attack sucks, since you can flurry at range.
For the move+attack - overrun is a good option. You can get the greater version without much problem, then you can charge, overrun to knock them down (and have them provoke attacks of opportunity by falling), then full attack them on the following round.
These ways you can avoid ever having to use the dreaded 3/4 BAB!!!
I see that my build idea isn't very popular. I went with dex first and took weapon finesse so I could hit about the same but my AC will be a bit higher. Basically, I sacrifised 1 damage for 1 AC at my current level.
It's good to see that people have had success with the monk.
@ Thalin, how does taking a quarterstaff gain me a neck slot?
If I enlarge myself I gain a str and damage bonus, but I also drop AC.
I see that my build idea isn't very popular. I went with dex first and took weapon finesse so I could hit about the same but my AC will be a bit higher. Basically, I sacrifised 1 damage for 1 AC at my current level.
Yep - not a big deal either way.
As you go up in level though, it changes things very much. As Dex continues to be the focus (to not give up to hit) the damage falls behind more and more.
However, since you mentioned a +2 Str bonus, I assume you have a 14 str at least, which is good because you qualify for Power Attack.
I strongly recommend you pick it up.
@ Thalin, how does taking a quarterstaff gain me a neck slot?
He's suggesting that since you will be using enchanted weapons, you don't need an amulet of mighty fists, freeing up your neck slot for other items (like Amulet of Natural armor)
However, all Monks use some unarmed combat, so Amulet of Mighty Fists is still a decent option even if you use the quarterstaff.
If you have a Druid or Ranger in the party, a Wand of Barkskin may be a good investment...
If I enlarge myself I gain a str and damage bonus, but I also drop AC.
Usually considered a good tradeoff, especially since you get reach.
However, for weapon finesse characters, not nearly as good, as you will lose -2 to hit (most characters will break even).
I see that my build idea isn't very popular. I went with dex first and took weapon finesse so I could hit about the same but my AC will be a bit higher. Basically, I sacrifised 1 damage for 1 AC at my current level.
It's good to see that people have had success with the monk.
@ Thalin, how does taking a quarterstaff gain me a neck slot?
If I enlarge myself I gain a str and damage bonus, but I also drop AC.
I believe thalin's point was that by having an enchanted quarterstaff you avoid the need to have an amulet of mighty fists to bypass damage reduction, get bonus elemental damage, etc.
for enlarge person the big draw is the upgrade in damage. Although being large helps with combat maneuvers too.
DANG ninja'd by my astute bifocalled colleague!
I actually think the Dex-grapple monk can work, although it is costly in feats (weapon finesse, agile maneuvers). You can rack up a ridiculous AC/CMD. Damage is the problem though, however you can get a belt that boosts str and dex, and you damage will be more akin to that of expert class, probably a little less than a rogue, if you can maximize your attacks, and get a decent amount of bonus damage from enchantments.
BUT you will have a strong CMB and the ability to use it tying up enemies or what have you. Pick up improved disarm, and if you are facing a humanoid opponent, who cares what damage you do, if you opponent can only do 1d3+str and eats an AoO for doing so.
I actually think the Dex-grapple monk can work, although it is costly in feats (weapon finesse, agile maneuvers). You can rack up a ridiculous AC/CMD. Damage is the problem though, however you can get a belt that boosts str and dex, and you damage will be more akin to that of expert class, probably a little less than a rogue, if you can maximize your attacks, and get a decent amount of bonus damage from enchantments.
BUT you will have a strong CMB and the ability to use it tying up enemies or what have you. Pick up improved disarm, and if you are facing a humanoid opponent, who cares what damage you do, if you opponent can only do 1d3+str and eats an AoO for doing so.
I agree you can be good at grapple with a Dex heavy Monk.
However, a Monk who is not Dex based is also going to be just as good at grapple, and when facing an opponent who is not easily grappled, he has something else effective to do.
I agree you can be decent at disarm (not great, but decent) with a Dex heavy Monk (Str heavy Monks won't be great at disarm either since neither can take Greater Disarm)
However, a Monk who is not Dex based is also going to be just as decent at disarm, and when facing an opponent who is not armed, he has something else effective to do.
See a pattern?
The problem isn't that Dex heavy Monk's aren't good at Combat Maneuvers - it's that Combat Maneuvers aren't always good, and you need to be able to contribute effectively when that is the case...
I actually think the Dex-grapple monk can work, although it is costly in feats (weapon finesse, agile maneuvers). You can rack up a ridiculous AC/CMD. Damage is the problem though, however you can get a belt that boosts str and dex, and you damage will be more akin to that of expert class, probably a little less than a rogue, if you can maximize your attacks, and get a decent amount of bonus damage from enchantments.
BUT you will have a strong CMB and the ability to use it tying up enemies or what have you. Pick up improved disarm, and if you are facing a humanoid opponent, who cares what damage you do, if you opponent can only do 1d3+str and eats an AoO for doing so.
I agree you can be good at grapple with a Dex heavy Monk.
However, a Monk who is not Dex based is also going to be just as good at grapple, and when facing an opponent who is not easily grappled, he has something else effective to do.
I agree you can be decent at disarm (not great, but decent) with a Dex heavy Monk (Str heavy Monks won't be great at disarm either since neither can take Greater Disarm)
However, a Monk who is not Dex based is also going to be just as decent at disarm, and when facing an opponent who is not armed, he has something else effective to do.
See a pattern?
The problem isn't that Dex heavy Monk's aren't good at Combat Maneuvers - it's that Combat Maneuvers aren't always good, and you need to be able to contribute effectively when that is the case...
you make very good points. Strength is going to make more impact in the long run. That's not say that Dex-monk isn't doing damage meaningfully, but he is trading 3-4 points of str-mod for dex-mod, so its a matter of where you want to fall on the defense vs offense track. Dex-monk is still going to have a boosted strength, just not as boosted as str-monk. Those missing strength points do add up when you are doing 5-7 attacks per full attack.
Dex-monk is a very defensive build, maybe too defensive. but he makes good use of combat reflexes and stand still, if you go that way. his reflex save is the best. he has a boost to acrobatics checks, stealth checks, and initiative checks, escape artist checks, etc. While damage is not his strong suit, he still has a lot going for him in unconventional ways.
The bonus to Ref saves is pretty unneeded. The Monk is already having a pretty good Ref save, then you add Improved Evasion and you're in pretty good shape whenever the DM says, "Roll Reflex"
I think you can do OK with an increased Dex over Str as long as you make sure to have a minimum of 14 Str, because Power Attack really is almost a required feat for Monks.
|
|
As to the TWF, this was assuming someone is correct in saying you can still take it to negate the -2 penalty; if this is not the case than I would not take the feat.
The main reason I like a weapon is keywords are typically better than + to hit. Holy goes a long way, both in terms of combating mid-level DR and upping your damage in Many scenarios. By the book I cannot get a +1 amulet of holy mighty fists. Also, GMW helps make it even more potent.
I also do like the neck slot; unlike the pally setup I hate monks to lose AC they need it.
The bonus to Ref saves is pretty unneeded. The Monk is already having a pretty good Ref save, then you add Improved Evasion and you're in pretty good shape whenever the DM says, "Roll Reflex"
I think you can do OK with an increased Dex over Str as long as you make sure to have a minimum of 14 Str, because Power Attack really is almost a required feat for Monks.
yeah we are in agreement. High dex is not as optimal but its not terrible either. its funny how we can quibble over the spread of 3 points at endgame :)
|
|
Not especially; remember only monk levels count toward flurry bonus et not; and Dragon Disciple has no straight BAB; and as an 11th level character you'd still only have 1st/2nd level spells (8 monk 1 Mage or 7 monk 2 Mage is the earliest you q). You'd get the worst of both worlds for a +2 str bonus AND not be able to put your int/cha as a dump stat.
Not especially; remember only monk levels count toward flurry bonus et not; and Dragon Disciple has no straight BAB; and as an 11th level character you'd still only have 1st/2nd level spells (8 monk 1 Mage or 7 monk 2 Mage is the earliest you q). You'd get the worst of both worlds for a +2 str bonus AND not be able to put your int/cha as a dump stat.
How do you figure on the qualifications for DD? Seems to me that 4 monk, 1 mage is good enough. Or am I missing something?
The next problem is the loss of BAB. So what? By level 15, your BAB will be 10, which is _only_ 5 shy of a full BAB. For starters, you'd DEFINITELY want a strength based build to take advantage of DD's +4 strength. That closes your to-hit gap down to a 3 point deficit. Spells like Alter Self or Enlarge person can bridge that gap by one more. The various Form of the Dragon spells will close and surpass the remaining 2 point gap quickly. Plus, most of these "size" bonuses add straight into strength, which allow you to hit WAY harder to make up for your lack of attack quantity.
PLUS you get +3 natural armor, +2 con (ALWAYS useful), d12 hit dice, unlimited flight, several extra melee-esque feats (Toughness, Blind-Fighting, Power Attack, Improved Initiative) AND 8 levels of arcane casting. You'll NEVER land a blast spell, but Treantmonk's wizard guide has better options anyway. Normal monks don't get summoning spells, haste and unlimited cantrips.
So, you're NOT losing to-hit, provided you're willing to spend one round buffing. You ARE losing attack quantity, but you're making up for it with attack QUALITY, which is better. Especially since you can move and still hit hard. You're losing monk AC and speed, which you make up for with Natural Armor and 60' FLIGHT.
Slowfall? Overshadowed by Feather Fall. High Jump? You can FLY. Spell Resistance? If you're that worried about it, take 3 more levels of sorcerer and just cast it.
Pure monks DO have their advantages. They don't have to pre-buff, they get more attacks and they're better at CMB and they get disease and poison immunities .... but Monk/DD sounds really strong to ME.
actually, I don't see any reason by RAW you can't use a two handed staff strike as part of a flurry and get 1.5 str bonus. After all it says any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with monk weapons. So a knee to the side of the head followed up by a two handed staff strike should work.
Because:
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands.
hmmm. I think I see how you're interpreting that. But that's .... So you think full = never greater than never less than str modifier? That's very sketchy if so. I can see it meaning never less than str modifier.
Repeat with bolding:
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands.
I think it's pretty clear they intend you to use your full Str bonus as a bonus to your damage for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether made with an off-hand attack or a weapon wielded in both hands.
Why would that apply to only damage reduction for off hand but not damage increase for two handed weaponry?
However even if you're right about that, you still get +3 damage per -1 to hit when power attack flurrying with a staff two handed. .
I'm not sure that's correct.
Flurry of Blows works like TWF, and when you use a double weapon for TWF it does not get treated as a two handed weapon in regards to Str bonus to damage, it gets treated as a one-handed weapon and an off-handed weapon.
James Jacobs clarified this in another thread. "As for double weapons...The rules for resolving attacks with two weapons work identically no matter if you have two different weapons or one single double weapon."
So, by that, using TWF with a staff means -1/+2 with primary attack and -1/+1 with off hand.
However, being that Monks apply full Str to all attacks with Flurry of Blows (off hand or not - the description of Monks actually contradicts itself whether "off hand" applies to Flurry of Blows at all), I think -1/+2 is a reasonable assumption for all attacks.
I agree there is a case to be made that if you make only your standard attacks with the staff, and your "TWF" attacks with a foot, that you aren't using the staff as a double weapon, and therefore, even though you are not applying 1.5 Str damage, you should apply -1/+3 with power attack.
However, if you use that reasoning, then you are going to get +1/-1 with your unarmed attacks for certain.
Though - I'm pretty sure that Power attack is INTENDED to work as +1/-1 when 1/2 Str bonus is applied, -1/+2 when full str bonus is applied, -1/+3 when 1.5 str damage is applied. The rules don't state it exactly that way (and they should), though I expect most DM's are reading it that way. I'm fairly certain that's the way it's supposed to work.
treantmonk is working on guide, as I understand it, as is angryscrub. Monks are getting a bad wrap because people want them to be as damaging as fighters, while also being able to do a lot of other stuff. They don't understand, IMHO, that there is a trade off, and sometimes this leads to monks not performing as well as one expects jet li or jackie chan would. Its a matter of expectations vs reality.
No, they want Monks to be not stupid. Ie, not be extraordinarily more expensive than other classes to buff up at the same level.
Thanks for everyone's input and advise, I really appreciate it. It's always a good idea, for me anyway, to run ideas by other people so it can be looked at in a different light or from another angle or (insert favorite analogy here). Very helpful, thanks again.