This does seem to be the easiest as well as a most flavorful solution. It follows a line of thinking seen in the Inquisitor class where wisdom adds to a lot of "things" the class should be good at (plus initiative-whaaat)The more I think about it, the more I am sure that the easiest fix to the monk is to allow them to use Wisdom in place of strength for their attack bonus. Previously I had advocated Wisdom bonus to damage, but I think I am going the other direction here.
The BIGGEST problem they generally face is that they are always trading off between strength and wisdom. If they had wisdom in their to-hit mechanic for attacks and combat maneuvers, they can let strength play a more secondary roll. Their damage suffers a little but, damage bonuses are a dime a dozen. To-hit bonuses are not.
This little change doesn't up their DPR that much, (it technically might lower it a little for straight up full attacks), but if gives them more synergy for the rest of their abilities. Slightly more stable defense (all the monk builds in the olympics were under par on AC), better stunning fist DCs, more Ki points with which to get extra attacks or +4 AC or various other special effects.
Mind you, I DO think that if you are a melee class, strength should be important, another reason why using Wisdom for both attack bonus and damage might be too much. Anyone else who has it "that good" has caveats attached to it (such as paladins who can use charisma to help them fight, but only against EVIL).
But for monks, there is the built in excuse that they fight differently, and when they aren't fighting "in their style" they suffer. Thusly we can say that wisdom to-hit is part of their "style" of fighting.
Monks don't need any more work on defenses...I would agree even early in this thread the fact that you can make a "turtle" monk was granted AC/defences seems to be an area where there is an acknowledgement that monks at least "Do alright". But much as being "only a healbot" was (somewhat) addressed for clerics. A monk who seems to bring "I can be hard to hit/hurt" produces "the hate" the thread was started for.
Which puts us back to the cyclical issues in this thread: of MAD hurts wisdom(DC) +attack roll (at 3/4 BAB if you move that round)+ a save (against what tends to be a good save or is ineffective due to monster type immunity) to the quasi-signature ability(stunning fist or its alternatives other than elemental fist which has energy resistances instead) seems to turn people off off the class
About the MAD issue...
All the classes seem to need at least 2 stats to succeed:Wizard: Int and one other* - Spell offense and defense
Sorc: Cha and One other - same reasons
Fighter: Str and Con - Dish it and take it
Ranger: Str and Dex - Melee and ranged combat
Rogue: DEX and Int - Agility and skill points
Paladin: Str and Cha - Melee damage and save bonuses/channeling
Cleric: Wis and Cha - Spells and Channeling
Druid: Wis and Cha - Spells and Wild empathy
Barbarian: Str and Con - Dish it and take it
Monk: Dex and Wis - Agility and Avoidability among other WIS based things.
* I say 'one other' becasue some ppl choose Con for more HP, Dex for higher AC from cloth, or WIS for higher saves vs mind affecting spells, etc. But a sucessful Wizard or Sorc that just focuses on Int or Cha and doesnt try to foster some kind of natural defense is a short lived one, imho.
There are gonna be some caveats to the above, but looking at the classes, its easy to see each has 2 ability scores that simply NEED to be high.
Monks are no different.
Monks can take Weapon Finesse: Unarmed Strike. So they don't need high STR to hit. They can have an OK STR (12 or 14)for a damage bonus, but don't require a high one. Most of their damage will come from the number of dice the end up rolling for damage as they level or magical items.
What they need is a better way to use the mobility they are obviously supposed to harness in combat. I think this is best represented by allowing flurries after or during movement. Or allowing a 5ft step between each flurry attack, something!
Sure just to hit. It makes the weapon enhancement keeper brought up still a nice "up" for the monk by (potentially) increasing his damage beyond his strength.
Monks can take Weapon Finesse: Unarmed Strike. So they don't need high STR to hit.
That's a terrible idea. The prime stat of monks as written is STR. Period. Trying to build a monk with a poor STR is at least as bad of an idea as building a sorcerer with a poor CHR.
Seriously, put a monk who cranks his STR at the same table as your finesse monk. It sounds like a nice idea, but in play the STR guy will throw out twice the damage and his defense won't be twice as bad as a result. And he won't pay a feat tax to do it.
Monks can take Weapon Finesse: Unarmed Strike. So they don't need high STR to hit.That's a terrible idea. The prime stat of monks as written is STR. Period. Trying to build a monk with a poor STR is at least as bad of an idea as building a sorcerer with a poor CHR.
Seriously, put a monk who cranks his STR at the same table as your finesse monk. It sounds like a nice idea, but in play the STR guy will throw out twice the damage and his defense won't be twice as bad as a result. And he won't pay a feat tax to do it.
I'm sorry you disagree.
You are operating under a false premise, I believe, taht Monks are suppsoed to be damage dealers first and foremost.They obviously aren't! Look at the class man.
Your idea is akin to a Rogue sacrificeing Dex or Int for Con simply so he can survive a possible counter attack...that's not his schtick.
You are operating under a false premise, I believe, taht Monks are suppsoed to be damage dealers first and foremost.
They obviously aren't! Look at the class man.
I'm operating under the premise that monks are supposed to be good for something.
Dealing damage isn't all of it, but it's part of it. So are combat maneuvers. Both of those things need strength.
Out of curiousity, what do you think the monk's supposed to be?
Dr. AnBuraid's 3 easy steps to a better monk class
1. Monks Fight with a Special Style
Monks use their the fists and specialized weapons along with their wisdom to attack their foes. They use their level in place of the BAB when doing so and use their wisdom bonus in place of strength to determine their attack bonus and CMB if they so choose, AT ALL TIMES, flurry or no flurry. A monk fighting using any other weapon, besides his fist or appropriate monk weapons, uses his 3/4 BAB and cannot flurry. If you are a multiclass fighter/monk, and you want that full monk BAB, fight like a monk fights.
2. Monks are trained in maneuvers
A monks training aids him in the performing of combat maneuvers, and monks should be less discouraged from using them than other classes. At 3rd level in place of standard maneuver training a monk does not provoke an attack of opportunity from a foe, when performing a combat maneuver, if his CMD is higher than the opponent's attack bonus. Improved maneuver feats are still a bonus, in that they remove any AoO altogether and grant bonuses to CMB/CMD.
3. Monks can revitalize themselves effectively in combat
Wholeness of Body is neat, but its too weak for the cost and takes too long to use. Monks already have a weaker HD than most frontline fighters, and wholeness of body should help address that. It should be changed to a swift action, so that it can be used along with an attack, withdraw action, fighting defensively, or total defense. It should also be buffed to twice the monks level in HP or perhaps twice his level + his Con bonus. At 7th level that would be equivalent to the average roll of 4th level cure critical spell (with the Con bonus standing if for the caster level bonus, somewhat). Now THAT is worth 2 ki points, and would likely allow the monk to absorb an extra level appropriate hit from a monster.
Take these three easy steps to happier and healthier monk :D
Edited for more clarity.
Monks can take Weapon Finesse: Unarmed Strike. So they don't need high STR to hit.That's a terrible idea. The prime stat of monks as written is STR. Period. Trying to build a monk with a poor STR is at least as bad of an idea as building a sorcerer with a poor CHR.
Seriously, put a monk who cranks his STR at the same table as your finesse monk. It sounds like a nice idea, but in play the STR guy will throw out twice the damage and his defense won't be twice as bad as a result. And he won't pay a feat tax to do it.
I'm sorry you disagree.
You are operating under a false premise, I believe, taht Monks are suppsoed to be damage dealers first and foremost.
They obviously aren't! Look at the class man.Your idea is akin to a Rogue sacrificeing Dex or Int for Con simply so he can survive a possible counter attack...that's not his schtick.
90% of a monks class features are about combat. You could argue high jump, dim door, slow fall, and tongue of sun and moon, but the movement ones are certainly applicable to combat.
So YES, combat is his schtick. Monks are about fighting unarmed, being absurdly healthy, and about the benefits of of esoteric training born of great wisdom.
You can build a un-combat-optimized rogue, for sure, but he's got a jillion skill points and a host of other uses built into his class. That is just not how monks fair, however. Want a monk that does other things? The Ki mystic from the APG is for you...
|
At 3rd level in place of standard maneuver training a monk does not provoke an attack of opportunity from a foe, when performing a combat maneuver, if his CMD is higher than the opponent's attack bonus.
Did you mean CMB? Cause with that +10 base to CMD he's going to beat most opponents out in the early levels. Is that intentional?
I think having the Monk use Wisdom for to hit and damage would be a worthwhile idea.
Personally I think two good representation of this would be the Inhuman Karnak who can study an opponent and do massive damage because he can perceive the point of inherent weakness in the structure/person/etc. Thus even though he's human strength he can go toe to toe with other supers.
Iron Fist prior to his buffing is another good example of the monk/martial artist. He's definitely a buff guy (good physical stats) but he's able to do a ton of damage with his iron fist technique which is basically using his chi (wisdom possible charisma the line is getting blurry) to do damage to things that a regular human wouldn't even dent.
This way you could simulate the crazy old wiry monk on the mountainside that despite being 5'2 and 80 pounds when dripping wet can totally kick your ass.
It's a pretty common archetype in the source material that isn't well reflected in the game mechanics. The only possible problem would be that it might turn the monk into the ultimate dip class for divine casters which is contrary to pathfinder design goals. Maybe wisdom based to hit and damage can only be done unarmored?
|
|
The only possible problem would be that it might turn the monk into the ultimate dip class for divine casters which is contrary to pathfinder design goals. Maybe wisdom based to hit and damage can only be done unarmored?
Not a huge problem for druids since they can cast Cat's Grace and other spells to improve their armor class.
At 3rd level in place of standard maneuver training a monk does not provoke an attack of opportunity from a foe, when performing a combat maneuver, if his CMD is higher than the opponent's attack bonus.Did you mean CMB? Cause with that +10 base to CMD he's going to beat most opponents out in the early levels. Is that intentional?
Ahhhhhh, forgot about that base +10. I was trying to make it an easy equation to figure out. So I guess its got to be if level + str + wis + dex is greater than the opponent's attack bonus. Or I guess it could be CMD vs attack bonus +10.
The intent was that it would be a boolean, so no extra rolling.
Edit- so Probably a +13ish at about 3rd level, vs something like an ogre's +7. An orge barbarian though, that would be more dicy.
The only possible problem would be that it might turn the monk into the ultimate dip class for divine casters which is contrary to pathfinder design goals. Maybe wisdom based to hit and damage can only be done unarmored?Not a huge problem for druids since they can cast Cat's Grace and other spells to improve their armor class.
Casters dipping into other clases hurts them too much for it to be REALLY over powered.
You'd have to put it further back than 1st level. One hit to the CL is not always a dealbreaker.
yes and no. If a druid or cleric takes a 1 level dip inot monk, they have to fight like a monk to get that +1 BAB, which limits them in terms of weapon choice and damage potential. Sure they might be able to hit with a little better with that quarterstaff, but to do that they lost their highest level spell/class feature in their other class. They also have to not wear armor which is also pretty debilitating as they level up. What shine their was would would wear off pretty fast.
You are operating under a false premise, I believe, taht Monks are suppsoed to be damage dealers first and foremost.
They obviously aren't! Look at the class man.
I'm operating under the premise that monks are supposed to be good for something.
Dealing damage isn't all of it, but it's part of it. So are combat maneuvers. Both of those things need strength.
Out of curiousity, what do you think the monk's supposed to be?
I said the following a ways back:
I believe a monk's role is to use his mobility to force opponents to pay attention to him to take out lesser foes or melee mezz bigger ones while the fighter focuses on the bigger nasties until he can get to the ones the monk has. He can heal himself slightly, and has the mobility to get away if he's bit off more than he can chew. This screams "off-tank" to me. Lets focus on what the role of the Monk is, and how to help it do it's job better, instead of discussing how powerful wizards are.
I said that I don't believe a monk is a primary damage dealer, not that he has no place in combat. Those 2 things aren't mutualy exclusive.
His mobility is the weapon, not his DPR. He moves around and "locks down" or occupy opponents that have gone after your cleric or other casters, and vs one opponent flanks with the rogue or the fighter to drop it quicker, trying to stun it to keep it out of play. He is an off-tank. He or she doesn't need to dish out tons of damage to be effective at this role, imho, but his speeed and avoidance instead.
|
You are operating under a false premise, I believe, taht Monks are suppsoed to be damage dealers first and foremost.
They obviously aren't! Look at the class man.
I'm operating under the premise that monks are supposed to be good for something.
Dealing damage isn't all of it, but it's part of it. So are combat maneuvers. Both of those things need strength.
Out of curiousity, what do you think the monk's supposed to be?
I said the following a ways back:
I believe a monk's role is to use his mobility to force opponents to pay attention to him to take out lesser foes or melee mezz bigger ones while the fighter focuses on the bigger nasties until he can get to the ones the monk has. He can heal himself slightly, and has the mobility to get away if he's bit off more than he can chew. This screams "off-tank" to me. Lets focus on what the role of the Monk is, and how to help it do it's job better, instead of discussing how powerful wizards are.I said that I don't believe a monk is a primary damage dealer, not that he has no place in combat. Those 2 things aren't mutualy exclusive.
His mobility is the weapon, not his DPR. He moves around and "locks down" or occupy opponents that have gone after your cleric or other casters, and vs one opponent flanks with the rogue or the fighter to drop it quicker, trying to stun it to keep it out of play. He is an off-tank. He or she doesn't need to dish out tons of damage to be effective at this role, imho, but his speeed and avoidance does.
Well said.
|
Would you say it makes the dinner experience more or less enjoyable when your food dances around and tries and fails to hurt you? My vote is on less - when the small punchy men run around swinging at air, they make the meat stringy and thin. I don't know what they hope to accomplish by dancing instead of fighting. I believe they are just trying to spite me out of an enjoyable culinary experience.
I've always viewed as dinner and a show.
Also, is it true that they taste better with ketchup? I never thought to try condiments.
I've hear the fabled "Awesome-Sauce" does little to help bring out the flavor, but you may find other condiments will work fine.
Have you tried deep-frying them in armor? I've heard the crunch adds to the culinary experience.
I said the following a ways back:
I believe a monk's role is to use his mobility to force opponents to pay attention to him to take out lesser foes or melee mezz bigger ones while the fighter focuses on the bigger nasties until he can get to the ones the monk has. He can heal himself slightly, and has the mobility to get away if he's bit off more than he can chew. This screams "off-tank" to me. Lets focus on what the role of the Monk is, and how to help it do it's job better, instead of discussing how powerful wizards are.I said that I don't believe a monk is a primary damage dealer, not that he has no place in combat. Those 2 things aren't mutualy exclusive.
His mobility is the weapon, not his DPR. He moves around and "locks down" or occupy opponents that have gone after your cleric or other casters, and vs one opponent flanks with the rogue or the fighter to drop it quicker, trying to stun it to keep it out of play. He is an off-tank. He or she doesn't need to dish out tons of damage to be effective at this role, imho, but his speeed and avoidance instead.
Why would you, as the monk's opponent, pay attention to him if he isn't really doing damage or anything useful to you?
Because your GM is charitable and playing them stupid to make the monk feel better? I don't think this is a great answer to class balance.
I said the following a ways back:
I believe a monk's role is to use his mobility to force opponents to pay attention to him to take out lesser foes or melee mezz bigger ones while the fighter focuses on the bigger nasties until he can get to the ones the monk has. He can heal himself slightly, and has the mobility to get away if he's bit off more than he can chew. This screams "off-tank" to me. Lets focus on what the role of the Monk is, and how to help it do it's job better, instead of discussing how powerful wizards are.I said that I don't believe a monk is a primary damage dealer, not that he has no place in combat. Those 2 things aren't mutualy exclusive.
His mobility is the weapon, not his DPR. He moves around and "locks down" or occupy opponents that have gone after your cleric or other casters, and vs one opponent flanks with the rogue or the fighter to drop it quicker, trying to stun it to keep it out of play. He is an off-tank. He or she doesn't need to dish out tons of damage to be effective at this role, imho, but his speeed and avoidance instead.Why would you, as the monk's opponent, pay attention to him if he isn't really doing damage or anything useful to you?
Because your GM is charitable and playing them stupid to make the monk feel better? I don't think this is a great answer to class balance.
Becasue every 6 seconds you're possibly coming out of a daze...and that was another 6 seconds you didn't hurt my Wizard buddy, who just hit you with another scorching ray...
So, you can ignore my "damage" or deal with my locking you down before you go after the wizard...oh wait, the fighter's done with his mob, now it's your turn, let me just move 5 ft this way to flank...
Becasue every 6 seconds you're possibly coming out of a daze...and that was another 6 seconds you didn't hurt my Wizard buddy, who just hit you with another scorching ray...
You should find a better wizard. :)
Beyond that, the finesse monk who's down a feat from the strength monk is better at playing the stunning fist game how, exactly? There's no reason you have to hit like an infant girl while tossing out those fort saves.
Edited to add: And note that I'm not claiming that the strength monk is great by any stretch of the word, just better.
Like I said I'm not sure if it would be too much a temptation for clerics and druids to bypass to have wisdom replace strength as a bonus to hit and damage without running the numbers.
I'm not opposed to multiclassing but I think that it shouldn't be done to cherry pick abilities from front-loaded classes.
Maybe structure it like smite in that part of it is good straight away but it really only gets great with multiple levels.
Like I said I'm not sure if it would be too much a temptation for clerics and druids to bypass to have wisdom replace strength as a bonus to hit and damage without running the numbers.
I'm not opposed to multiclassing but I think that it shouldn't be done to cherry pick abilities from front-loaded classes.
Maybe structure it like smite in that part of it is good straight away but it really only gets great with multiple levels.
If it only applied to "monk" weapons and unarmed strikes perhaps it would mitigate that temptation.
To go a level route perhaps make it like the deuellist(sp) canny defense ability increase +1 per level in monk up to wis mod? Although if you go that route I could see it adding to str mod rather than replace
If he rolls a natural 1.
Hmmm...same DC calculation as a Sorcerer's spells...do they all only work on a natural 1?
DC is 10 + 1/2 Monk's level + WIS.DC for a Sorcs spell is 10 + spell level + CHA.
Spell level for a sorc is half their level...
So, really?
Also, what spell the wizard chose is irrelevant, it's just important that he got to cast. Nitpicking obviously unimportant parts of an argument is beneath you guys, really.
A finese monk is using his probably amped DEX to land those stunning fists with, whereas a monk who spreads out accross strength as well won't hit as well, even if he does more damage, assuming he's pumping points in to DEX and WIS as well, and if he's not he's also more hittable. That's a sad panda.
So the argument is he'll rue the day he ran accross your STR monk because you did like maybe 3 whole extra poitns of damage per hit (maybe)?
Hmmm...same DC calculation as a Sorcerer's spells...do they all only work on a natural 1?
DC is 10 + 1/2 Monk's level + WIS.
DC for a Sorcs spell is 10 + spell level + CHA.
Uh, sure. Does your monk have a 20 WIS? 20 CHR is the lowest I'd start a sorcerer with even in 10 point buy.
Does he have Spell Focus? Greater spell focus? Bloodline powers that amp up his DCs? Is buying a +WIS item his highest priority as buying or crafting a +CHR item pretty much is for the sorcerer?
No.
A finese monk is using his probably amped DEX to land those stunning fists with, whereas a monk who spreads out accross strength as well won't hit as well, even if he does more damage, assuming he's pumping points in to DEX and WIS as well, and if he's not he's also more hittable. That's a sad panda.
Oh, I'm not spreading across strength. It's my highest stat by far.
If the point buy is generous enough, I'll get some dex, too, sure. Otherwise it's going to be lower.
When what you do in combat is mostly attack, trading damage for AC even-up is a bad trade; it's an extra bad trade if you need to burn a feat to do it. This isn't an opinion; this is math. That's even putting aside that AC pretty much falls out of the game by the midlevels. If you don't believe me, build/post a level 10 or 12 monk and I'll point you to something CR-appropriate in the standard Bestiary that almost always hits it with each of its attacks.
I'd like to stay away from class comparisons. In one way or another, each class can trump another in some fashion.It is definitely needed. They wizard has to boost one stat, so more than likely a wizard's primary stat will be higher than the monk's. There is also the fact that if something is immune/highly resistant to one of the wizards/sorcerer's spells it can choose a different spell. I notice you keep assuming an easy path to the wizard/victim, just like some wizard defenders assume an easy defense.So...give the monk "pounce"?
Is that the concensus?As someone said earlier, the monk two step is as follows (at least against low fort save types)
First round move up and stun.
Second round full attack.Stunning fist has an equivalent save to the highest DC Wizard spells and takes the person the monk is fighting out of the game for a round if it fails.
While I wouldn't mind something like pounce for a monk, it isn't needed because it isn't a weakness.
Agreed
Like I said I'm not sure if it would be too much a temptation for clerics and druids to bypass to have wisdom replace strength as a bonus to hit and damage without running the numbers.
I'm not opposed to multiclassing but I think that it shouldn't be done to cherry pick abilities from front-loaded classes.
Maybe structure it like smite in that part of it is good straight away but it really only gets great with multiple levels.
If it only applied to "monk" weapons and unarmed strikes perhaps it would mitigate that temptation.
To go a level route perhaps make it like the deuellist(sp) canny defense ability increase +1 per level in monk up to wis mod? Although if you go that route I could see it adding to str mod rather than replace
Adding to strength mod would probably be decent. It's not like monks typically get access to thf x1.5 multipliers (temple sword being a notable exception).
That way you could still have monks like the stereotypical elderly grandmaster who can do good damage without great strength stats.
|
This isn't an opinion; this is math. That's even putting aside that AC pretty much falls out of the game by the midlevels. If you don't believe me, build/post a level 10 or 12 monk and I'll point you to something CR-appropriate in the standard Bestiary that almost always hits it with each of its attacks.
Granted, this isn't a Monk problem, it's a 3.5 thing - atk bonus scales up far quicker than AC does, so at some point everybody is hitting everybody unless somebody goes optimizing crazy for AC - which is, for the very same reason, sub-optimal.
Also, killing things before they kill you is always a better tactic than playing war of attrition when limited resources are involved.
The more I think about it, the more I am sure that the easiest fix to the monk is to allow them to use Wisdom in place of strength for their attack bonus. Previously I had advocated Wisdom bonus to damage, but I think I am going the other direction here.
The BIGGEST problem they generally face is that they are always trading off between strength and wisdom. If they had wisdom in their to-hit mechanic for attacks and combat maneuvers, they can let strength play a more secondary roll. Their damage suffers a little but, damage bonuses are a dime a dozen. To-hit bonuses are not.
I'd probably let them use WIS in place of STR for both (and combat maneuver stuff) if I were redesigning the class -- or let them add both to both. As-is, no matter what reading any of the abilities or flavor text would tell you, the prime stat for a monk is STR by far.
(For a game I'm running with a monk, my solution was to leave the class as-is but give the monk PC what amounted to a LOT more stat points than other characters.)
I allows monk to use wisdom in place of strength for purposes of attacks, damage, and CMB/CMD. The theory craft worked out well, and now I am trying it in a game to see if it works on paper.
Well, actually it is not a monk, but a variant martial artist class. It still has flurry of blows, high all around save, the bonus feats, and the ability to inflict status affects. I got rid of the supernatural stuff like SR though.
Hmmm...same DC calculation as a Sorcerer's spells...do they all only work on a natural 1?
DC is 10 + 1/2 Monk's level + WIS.
DC for a Sorcs spell is 10 + spell level + CHA.
Uh, sure. Does your monk have a 20 WIS? 20 CHR is the lowest I'd start a sorcerer with even in 10 point buy.
Does he have Spell Focus? Greater spell focus? Bloodline powers that amp up his DCs? Is buying a +WIS item his highest priority as buying or crafting a +CHR item pretty much is for the sorcerer?
No.
A finese monk is using his probably amped DEX to land those stunning fists with, whereas a monk who spreads out accross strength as well won't hit as well, even if he does more damage, assuming he's pumping points in to DEX and WIS as well, and if he's not he's also more hittable. That's a sad panda.
Oh, I'm not spreading across strength. It's my highest stat by far.
If the point buy is generous enough, I'll get some dex, too, sure. Otherwise it's going to be lower.
When what you do in combat is mostly attack, trading damage for AC even-up is a bad trade; it's an extra bad trade if you need to burn a feat to do it. This isn't an opinion; this is math. That's even putting aside that AC pretty much falls out of the game by the midlevels. If you don't believe me, build/post a level 10 or 12 monk and I'll point you to something CR-appropriate in the standard Bestiary that almost always hits it with each of its attacks.
Oh my, I'm missing out on a +2 and whatever bloodline bonus (?).
Yes he's going to buy stuff to amp up his WIS, DEX and STR. In that order.It's not an AC trade only, its using 2 stats more effectively that trying to use 3 stats, or the wrong 2 stats.
A character without a Con item is a dead character.
For a melee character, this is doubly true.
OMG there goes my whole argument! I didn't think of CON items!
Lucky for me there's belts that cover that along with DEX...?
Lucky for me there's belts that cover that along with DEX...?
... and get expensive fast.
Let's not pretend there's not an opportunity cost there. The difference between a +6 to one stat belt and a +6 to two stats belt is 54,000 gold. Make it a three stat belt and it's an extra 54,000 over even that.
Lucky for me there's belts that cover that along with DEX...?
... and get expensive fast.
Let's not pretend there's not an opportunity cost there. The difference between a +6 to one stat belt and a +6 to two stats belt is 54,000 gold. Make it a three stat belt and it's an extra 54,000 over even that.
How much does it cost the Sorc to buy a +6 CHA headband and a +6 CON belt? Or your Monk to buy same belt but with STR and CON instead of DEX and CON?
What point is there to this post?|
|
Lucky for me there's belts that cover that along with DEX...?
... and get expensive fast.
Let's not pretend there's not an opportunity cost there. The difference between a +6 to one stat belt and a +6 to two stats belt is 54,000 gold. Make it a three stat belt and it's an extra 54,000 over even that.
How much does it cost the Sorc to buy a +6 CHA headband and a +6 CON belt? Or your Monk to buy same belt but with STR and CON instead of DEX and CON?
What point is there to this post?
Monk is a melee class. He will be hit on his head. He needs Con.
Sorcerer is a caster, he's going to hang back flying with mirror images up and try not to be hit. He doesn't need Con that badly. Sure, it's nice and stuff, but it's not as vital as classes that rely on being right next to the enemy to actually do something.
Lucky for me there's belts that cover that along with DEX...?
... and get expensive fast.
Let's not pretend there's not an opportunity cost there. The difference between a +6 to one stat belt and a +6 to two stats belt is 54,000 gold. Make it a three stat belt and it's an extra 54,000 over even that.
How much does it cost the Sorc to buy a +6 CHA headband and a +6 CON belt? Or your Monk to buy same belt but with STR and CON instead of DEX and CON?
What point is there to this post?
Kryz as adding additional features to a magic items adds 1.5 times each of the the cheaper features (pick x-1 to multiply if x features of the item are the same cost) There is a point to the expense of the items in question 36k for a single stat +6, vs 90k for a +6 2 stat, and 144k for +6 3 stat. Item budget wise he does have a point.