You cant say that a fighter or a ranger is a better DPSer and then say they can also be better grapplers too, the fact is fighters and rangers have to make a choice between the two. If a fighter decides he is going to take some grapple feats and be effective then that is less feats for power attack, weapon focus, weapon specialization, cleave, and so on and so forth.That is the point of a fighter build, you have to choose a build. very rarely can you dabble in multiple feat trees and be amazing at both.
the monk is simply very good at grappling while being relatively threatening at DPS. Not to mention their other boons which make them impossible to kill.
Send in the Monk, stand back with some bows and take out the rest of them or pick off them off from a distance.
Abundent step, stunning fist, flurry of blows. Rince and repeat to all enemies in the combat or take down the really threatening one with some grapples or trip manuevers.
Actually a fighter can be good at two things now with the extra feats in pathfinder. The TWF + Archery is the hardest most likely because they both take a lot of feats, even that one is not impossible.
Stunning fist does not work so well at higher levels due to really high fort saves. Abundant step is a standard action IIRC, and by the time the monk's turn comes back around the enemy has relocated if he felt it was necessary. Grappling and Tripping work well against humanoid opponents, but monsters are normally harder to deal with when it comes to CMB checks.
I think you have to build your monk based on the campaign at hand.
Neat idea about monk steps between flurry attacks
I like this even better than the critical-enhancing idea (mainly because it seems less likely to have unintended game-breaking consequences when combined with everything else that affects criticals, and way better use of flavor).
How do you handle attacks of opportunity? No AoO for the first 5' step, then normal afterwards? Allowing acrobatics checks at normal opponent's CMD (costing 10' of movement for "half speed") or forcing them to go up to the 5+CMD amount for full speed? Do you cap movement, like only allowing steps equal to moving up to half their total land speed? Do you restrict them from being able to take a step if they cannot reach a new foe to attack (so as to prevent them from trying to get a function akin to "spring attack" for free, except for still provoking an AoO)?
Just thinking about it, I'd probably do most of that, giving one 5' step risk-free, letting the DC of acrobatics checks determine whether the player wants to move "half speed" or potentially full, and requiring moving to within their reach of a potential target with each step. Or maybe just specifying that steps can only occur if they have at least one potential flurry of blows attack remaining (so that they can step back if they give up their last attack and provoke an AoO). Hmmm...
Tie it to the standard Fast Movement disclaimer (a monk wearing armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra movement). Maybe boost it at level 9 so they can move 10 feet between attacks, and at level 18, 15 feet (corresponding with the +30 feet and +60 feet Fast Movement bonuses, respectively)? Maybe take away the monk's level one bonus feat (since they're almost getting spring attack for free at level 1, except for the crucial AoO provocation), or maybe instead have this ability start at 2nd or 3rd level (3rd would add to the feel that it's part of Fast Movement)?
Considering my current game has an eidolon with pounce (bite/2x claws, all at +3 to hit and +2 more for charge for 1d6+2 each at level 1, in addition to whatever the summoner does), this doesn't seem unbalanced to me at all. And would really make the monk completely unique.
As it stands, with the monk at its base, I would probably never play one (and not just because if it's Pathfinder, I'm stuck GMing). Not because I couldn't contribute, but because I'd feel there were always better class options where the benefits of the class complemented each other better. Being highly mobile but extremely dependent on not moving is weird. Something like this would make me feel like I could do something no other class could do, which really is a feeling that monks miss. It just feels like anyone with any speed-buff item and the Spring Attack feat can get 90% of the benefit of a monk's mobility. Really, Spring Attack isn't even necessary for that.
Also, after checking the pre-reqs for Cockatrice Strike (which I mentioned after the change-critical-threat-range idea), pure monks can't get it, ever. They never get a +16 base attack bonus, since they qualify for feats off their real BAB, not the flurry of blows BAB. I don't get that at all, but whatever.
You mean the book that hates monks? Sure do. Best ability he gets from the APG is the ability to die, strike his name from history, and res the party members that can actually do things and not suck.
That ability is awesome, you could name your monk Noe or A and even gods would speak funny everafter.
Also, the APG *patched* the barbarian and monk. Its completly reasonable that saying that Paizo recognized a mistake, albeit late, and try to fix it.
Humbly,
Yawar
but even with an RP based idea it has to be viable mechanically.And it is.
Noone has yet shown how the fighter, unless he spends a substantial amount of gold (and not even then in some cases), can match the monk's mobility.
The monk doesn't need to match any other class in that class' core strength. The monk doesn't attack other classes where that other class is strong, it attacks that other class where that other class is weak.
How mechanically viable the monk is, is still up for debate.
The games does not care if you use gold or not as long as you get results. I am not saying the monk has to match another class in it's area, but many people want it to be able to replace one of the classic four, and keep the party going.
Example: From a party PoV you can justify a paladin instead of a fighter. Pally's do decent damage even when not smiting, more when they smite. They can also cure HP and status affects. They can also be good at diplomacy.
As far as attacking another class's weakness, any class can down any other class in the right situation. Doing it consistently is another thing altogether.
My point is basically that people should be aware of the potential pit falls and avoid them. The monk just seems to have more hidden pit falls than any other class.
Stunning fist does not work so well at higher levels due to really high fort saves. Abundant step is a standard action IIRC, and by the time the monk's turn comes back around the enemy has relocated if he felt it was necessary. Grappling and Tripping work well against humanoid opponents, but monsters are normally harder to deal with when it comes to CMB checks.
I think you have to build your monk based on the campaign at hand.
Abundant Step is a move action. That means you can move to pretty much -anywhere- on the battle mat and attack all in the same round.
Not everything has a really high fort save - at least not so high that the monk can't stun it. Remember, also, that one of the first things a monk is going to get is a wisdom stat booster - because wisdom applies to a lot of things (from stunning fist to AC), so that one magic item is the equivalent of a lot more magic items but for a much cheaper cost.
The monk has to work on several ability scores. Which one will suffer depends on the player in question, but you need a high fort save DC to make higher level monsters fail them on average. Now if the monk has a high wisdom modifier and hopefully "ability focus" he can stun to his heart's content, but if not stunning blow is a pipe dream.
PS:Abundant step being a move action is good.
PS2:I agree that wisdom should not be dumped. For the sake of this discussion since we agree we will assume that wisdom is a top 2 stat priority.
Abundant Step is a move action. That means you can move to pretty much -anywhere- on the battle mat and attack all in the same round.
Except for the whole "After using this spell, you can't take any other actions until your next turn" part of "you can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door."
Which someone else mentioned earlier, so I can't take credit for remembering.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Abundant Step is a move action. That means you can move to pretty much -anywhere- on the battle mat and attack all in the same round.Except for the whole "After using this spell, you can't take any other actions until your next turn" part of "you can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door."
Which someone else mentioned earlier, so I can't take credit for remembering.
Not my reading.
"Abundant Step (Su)
At 12th level or higher, a monk can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door. Using this ability is a move action that consumes 2 points from his ki pool. His caster level for this effect is equal to his monk level. He cannot take other creatures with him when he uses this ability."
He isn't casting a spell, he has the supernatural ability to slip between spaces as if using the spell dimension door, only he can't bring others and it is a move action, rather than the standard action dimension door normally is.
Otherwise, there would be no reason to change it from a standard action in the spell to a move action.
Actually, it does. Every gold piece the fighter spends trying to match the monk in his core competence is a gold piece the monk is spending to be even better at his core competence.I was not talking about matching the monk. Mobility is good for any class, and a fighter that can get to point X without using a caster's spell means the party is better off in the long run.
That's true of any class.
My point was that with the monk it is harder to spot the pit falls.
It's not that the monk has more hidden pit falls. It's that a lot of people aren't experienced in thinking outside of the "Defender, Striker, Leader, Controller" box. Monks certainly require a player to think outside of that box.
People see flurry of blows, and I can run fast(monk's movement). They immediately combine the two, but the game mechanics do not allow it. They also see abundant step, and think the same thing. Wholeness of body does not give enough healing to matter when comparing the healing you get to the monsters they fight.
I houseruled it to either 1/2 monk level x Wis mod or monk level x 1/2 Wis mod. I forget which it was. I just looked at the PF monk and the ability did not get any better. It should at least be able to counter a standard attack or it is not worth using.Edit:for clarity and formatting.
|
|
People see flurry of blows, and I can run fast(monk's movement). They immediately combine the two, but the game mechanics do not allow it.
True, but then is the problem with the class or with some peoples interpretation of what they want the class to be, rather than seeing what the class is? How is it that some are certain that the design of the Monk is wrong and not that their preconceived ideas of the Monk is the thing that is in error in the context of this game? What we see is Jason B's idea of the Monk, it is correct for Jason B else he wouldn't have left it the way it is for 4 printings. If you don't like Jason B's Monk there is nothing wrong with what some are doing, rewrite the class. Paizo is unlikely to set the lawyers on you for this.
Musings,
S.
One thing I would -not- want is for the Monk to be turned into just another DPSer like the Fighter.
I don't care whether the Monk can do as much DPS as the Fighter. That's not his job.This is the job of the monk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXIGP6_fNZk&feature=related
The focus is on fast movement and combat manuevers, not high levels of DPS.
Dont get me wrong Tony Jaa is fun, but as you hear bones breaking almost every hit and certainly on each grapple I don't buy the "not high levels of DPS". And thought it is problematic to assign game features to film couldn't you duplicate those results with tripping critical, stunning critical type feats. As we all know CM's depend, within the context of the game, on successfully hitting, again relegating you to the position of comparison with fighter types
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub4LJd0c_jE&feature=related
Both Japanese martial texts and Spanish fencing texts focus on the same things. So not really silly for a swashbuckling themed game to see a fighter-type doing similar things to Tony Jaa
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I view the monk, I see a ton of defensive abilities, fast movement, stunning fist, and a pretty good set of skills. I see a 'heat-seeking missile' designed to penetrate the enemy's defensive line and get to the creamy center.
The class is no more confusing than is, say, the Wizard. A new player might look at fireball and lightning bolt and think that the wizard is designed to do lots of damage to an area of effect.
I see the heat seeking missile dive behind the defensive line (which is usually pretty darn close to the creamy center), make a single attack, and proceed to get swashed to death on the following round, especially since he probably didn't scoop out the creamy center with his opening attack.
I see the monk separating himself from the party, and now he's locked into combat unless he can wriggle his way out, and given the relative ease in using brutish minions with pretty solid CMDs, continual tumbling only gets you so far. Especially when reach is concerned (something the monk can't easily capitalize on).
I see the monk diving to the enemy and finding they're not quite as good at grappling that lich as they expected since there's freedom of movement involved. I see the monk getting surprised when they find stunning fist doesn't work on the caster he was trying to take down.
I see the monk needing to fly via a magic item just as much as the fighter, negating the speed boost that he gets on the ground, equalizing him with the fighter with the same boots of flying, cloak of the bat, or the fighter's celestial armor.
I see the monk as being less damaging than the fighter, less stealthy than the rogue, less skillful than the ranger, less versatile than the sorcerer, less durable than the paladin, and with less party support than the druid. I didn't even note the best classes in their areas. A bard is more versatile. A rogue is more skillful and potentially more damaging, and is pretty good for disrupting casts (concealment + stealth + readied action = Concentration check vs Sneak Attack Damage).
The monk isn't really good at anything, and it's a fairly poor excuse for a jack of all trades character, because it usually has to specialize just to be 3rd rate.
I'm not really clear what point you're making. Did I not just refer to the job of monks, in the very same post you responded to, as being "fast movement and combat manuevers"? Then, you start talking about "tripping criticals, stunning critical type feats" which is getting to the exact same idea?
The point is you seem, and I do mean seem it may not be how you truly feel but it's coming across that way, to become hyper opposed to any sort of comparison with a fighter type. Yet to do what you want the monk to do requires building and planning along the same lines as a fighter type.
While you personally may not care if Monk's unarmed damage goes up one of the recurrent themes in this thread has been lack of damage (along with MAD and AC issues). So it seems that the most useful thing this thread can do is provide options to mitigate these complaints. I like the mobility and maneuvers focus idea you mentioned now how do you implement it I threw out a crit based monk to open up maneuver opportunities spurred by critical hits. Just throw some crunch down to tell us how you would get to your ideal monk.
try to make a wizard a fighter.Tenser's Transformation ;)
How so? The wizard gets:
+4 enhancement bonus to Strength
+4 enhancement bonus to Dexterity
+4 enhancement bonus to Constitution
+4 natural armor bonus to AC
+5 competence bonus on Fortitude saves
proficiency with all simple and martial weapons.
base attack bonus equals your character level (which may give you multiple attacks).
inability to cast spells
He does not gain:
up to 11 bonus feats
Armor Training (reduced ACP and better movement)
Weapon Training (+1 to +4 to hit and damage)
Weapon Mastery (better threat range and cannot be disarmed)
Bravery
The wizard can enter combat but he will not come close to being a fighter.
You mean the book that hates monks? Sure do. Best ability he gets from the APG is the ability to die, strike his name from history, and res the party members that can actually do things and not suck.That ability is awesome, you could name your monk Noe or A and even gods would speak funny everafter.
Also, the APG *patched* the barbarian and monk. Its completly reasonable that saying that Paizo recognized a mistake, albeit late, and try to fix it.
Humbly,
Yawar
Ah, great idea. I think I will make a monk named "How who when" and bide my time for the day I can use this ability. Heck the name even sounds kinda Asian when spoken.
Yeah they tried. I give them credit for that much :)
try to make a wizard a fighter.Tenser's Transformation ;)How so? The wizard gets:
+4 enhancement bonus to Strength
+4 enhancement bonus to Dexterity
+4 enhancement bonus to Constitution
+4 natural armor bonus to AC
+5 competence bonus on Fortitude saves
proficiency with all simple and martial weapons.
base attack bonus equals your character level (which may give you multiple attacks).
inability to cast spellsHe does not gain:
up to 11 bonus feats
Armor Training (reduced ACP and better movement)
Weapon Training (+1 to +4 to hit and damage)
Weapon Mastery (better threat range and cannot be disarmed)
BraveryThe wizard can enter combat but he will not come close to being a fighter.
So we cast Form of the Dragon III, gaining a +10 size bonus to strength, a +8 size bonus to Constitution, +8 natural armor bonus, immunity to an energy type, a lot of great natural attacks, DR 10/magic, and a breath weapon, which will last 3 plus some hours.
We could then cast, if desired, stoneskin for DR 10/adamantine to go with our DR 10/magic, since now you'll magic and adamantine weapons to overcome our damage reduction. It too will last 3 plus some hours.
We could then cast, if desired, mage armor, bull's strength, cat's grace, bear's endurance which last all day.
We could also cast Heroism to get a +2 to all attack rolls, saves, and skill checks for 3 plus some hours.
Summon a monster then coup de grace the monster with Vampiric Touch to get some hardcore temporary HP.
And I guess if you were just trying to get the BAB for CMD and some more temporary HP, finish it up with Transformation.
Note: It would be soooooo much more effective to cast the aforementioned spells on the FIGHTER or better yet Barbarian. The sheer amount of ass-kickery that a fully buffed fighter or barbarian like this would be capable of brings tears to my proud GMing eyes.
Not to mention it's far more effective to split tasks, since while the fighter/barbarian-dragon is storming through Tokyo, you can be riding on his back hurling doomsday from your hands. ^-^
Teamwork is beautiful. Q.Q
The fighter and the monk are different classes. To compare them in combat would be like comparing the rogue and fighter in combat.
I'm not really clear what point you're making. Did I not just refer to the job of monks, in the very same post you responded to, as being "fast movement and combat manuevers"? Then, you start talking about "tripping criticals, stunning critical type feats" which is getting to the exact same idea?
The point is you seem, and I do mean seem it may not be how you truly feel but it's coming across that way, to become hyper opposed to any sort of comparison with a fighter type. Yet to do what you want the monk to do requires building and planning along the same lines as a fighter type.
While you personally may not care if Monk's unarmed damage goes up one of the recurrent themes in this thread has been lack of damage (along with MAD and AC issues). So it seems that the most useful thing this thread can do is provide options to mitigate these complaints. I like the mobility and maneuvers focus idea you mentioned now how do you implement it I threw out a crit based monk to open up maneuver opportunities spurred by critical hits. Just throw some crunch down to tell us how you would get to your ideal monk.
Please don't deflect and actually put the crunch: the stats, numbers, skills, feats to get the monk you think would do the job in combat.
I reject your premise. The most useful thing this thread can do is show how the monk can be useful to a party, NOT how to increase their damage. As I've tried to point out repeeatedly, trying to increase the damage output of the monk will likely end up nerfing the monk (because it causes the monk to try to mimic another class' strengths).
Then post your 13th level monk like you stated you would. I followed through with my wizard, showing that a monk built to lock down enemies is an inneffective use of a character. If you still think your monk has something unique he brought, post it. Otherwise admit your DM was softballing you by playing monsters ineffectually or not understanding rules.
You're joking, right?
Let's see..
Round 1.) Form of the Dragon III
Round 2.) Stoneskin
Round 3.) Mage's Armor
Round 4.) Bull's Strength
Round 5.) Cat's Grace
Round 6.) Bear's Endurance (which doesn't last all day, it lasts 1 min/round)
Round 7.) Heroismby the time you're ready to fight, the fight will be over. And you'll -still- suck as a melee type, because you won't have any of the fighter's feats, any of the Barbarian's rages, etc.
Silly goose. Didn't you notice I listed their durations? The wizard can cast all of these ahead of time. With a metamagic rod of extend the good ones can last more or less all day, which is usually more than enough time to get the job done.
I did forget the duration on the ability buff spells, so I guess we'd need to use magic items instead.
But yeah...during the fight? Haha, that's funny. Not even my 11 year old brother did that, and he meleed with his sorcerer in dragon-form all the time. Man, he was a beastly little kobold. ^.^
One thing I would -not- want is for the Monk to be turned into just another DPSer like the Fighter.
I don't care whether the Monk can do as much DPS as the Fighter. That's not his job.This is the job of the monk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXIGP6_fNZk&feature=related
The focus is on fast movement and combat manuevers, not high levels of DPS.
Loved that fight scene. Great stuff.
Edit: A fine example of beating or running circles around a bunch of mooks and using terrain well. The final boss fight is the Monk fighting equally against another Monk.
I feel I need to add a few points after reading through the entire thread.
0 - Martial Arts are not just "Kung-foo", Martial Arts are pretty much any form of fighting. Fencing, Karate, Kenpo, Kung-foo, Wrestling, Boxing, Archery, etc...
1 - While a monk is a martial artist, how a Monks abilities are described is entirely up to the player and DM. (Abilities can be renamed and flavor can be changed.)
2 - A Greco-Roman wrestler is just as much a martial artist as someone who practices karate.
3 - A fighter can easily be setup like a fencer out of "The Musketeer" and would be just as much a martial artist as the wrestler.
4 - No class "sucks"... one only has classes they do not like for personal reasons.
5 - No gaming table is "exactly" like another. What works in real play at one table may not work at another.
6 - A badly played fighter can "suck" just as much as a badly played monk.
7 - Theoretical numbers and math cannot calculate for personal luck, imperfections in dice or rolling surface, or party/player dynamics.
FYI- The above statements are my own observations. Your millage may vary.
|
|
Lots of points about the monk I will address below
Point by point again.
1. Getting behind the defensive line means the enemy has to make a choice, go after the one guy behind you or go after the 3 guys ahead of you. The "Heat Seeking Missile" option is only one choice you could decide to make, mainly focused on getting to casters who are hiding behind a meat shield.
2. If a monk positions well on the heat seeking missile attack, the only thing that gets a full round attack is the caster he went after, who is likely stunned (see below).
If the meat shield is intended to keep people away from the creamy center, it now has to decide if it should go back to the casters (therefore no longer serving the function of keeping the other 3 players off and moving the battle closer the caster and clumping all of the enemies to be vulnerable for area effects) or stay and focus on the other 3 in front, leaving the creamy center to fend for itself.
If a monster was going to grapple you, I would rather they do it near the caster than out in the open. It isn't like they wouldn't try this move anywhere on the battlefield if that was their go to move. The monk has more chance to escape using mobility. I mean half movement for tumble isn't so bad if you move twice as fast as everyone else.
3. Save DC for stunning fist is 10+1/2 your character level + your wisdom. So the save DC is always going to be tough since it is basically 10 + the rate high fort saves increase, + either my primary or secondary modifier. It's a around 50/50 save for a high fort save class and much, much lower for a non-fort based class. Plus you get it enough times a day it isn't something you really worry about "losing".
So my stunning fist has a much better than 50/50 chance of taking the caster out of the round completely. If the big baddies fall back to the caster, I try and back out and let my casters bring on the area effects. If not, flurry of blows myself on the caster in round 2, starting with another stunning fist.
Not to mention your Lich probably has touch attack based spells...not so good against the monk.
4. Boots of fly are nice when needed, but nothing beats abundant step, which lets you get to the creamy center, stun it, and then run away from the creamy center when needed.
Feats like Spring Attack let you jab big baddie with a stunning fist and clear a path into a disabled foe, but that is a build preference.
The point is, it's not a one trick pony. The monk is all about options.
|
|
So we cast Form of the Dragon III, gaining a +10 size bonus to strength, a +8 size bonus to Constitution, +8 natural armor bonus, immunity to an energy type, a lot of great natural attacks, DR 10/magic, and a breath weapon, which will last 3 plus some hours.
Which is an 8th level spell, meaning you are at least 15th level. I still have abundant step, I get initiative and you are better than 50/50 to be stunned and not casting anything while you wait for me to flurry next round.
If your 16th or higher it is better than 50/50 you will be dead by quivering palm.
It takes rounds to cast things. This is the best part of the monk, it gets to the caster before the caster can set up behind the meatshields.
|
|
Then post your 13th level monk like you stated you would. I followed through with my wizard, showing that a monk built to lock down enemies is an inneffective use of a character. If you still think your monk has something unique he brought, post it. Otherwise admit your DM was softballing you by playing monsters ineffectually or not understanding rules.
I reject your premise. The most useful thing this thread can do is show how the monk can be useful to a party, NOT how to increase their damage. As I've tried to point out repeeatedly, trying to increase the damage output of the monk will likely end up nerfing the monk (because it causes the monk to try to mimic another class' strengths).
I'll jump in here.
You will win initiative (you have +16). Not sure what you'll cast, but with all high saves and a cloak, I'll have a better than 50/50 chance of avoiding at least full damage from it. And you picked the level where I get Spell Resistance 23.
When it is my turn I will abundant step and stun you the next round. Save will be 10 + 6 (1/2 Class) + Probably 5 or 6 wisdom at that level, particularly with a 20 point buy...
Meaning you'll have a less than 50/50 chance of not being stunned.
There are cat and mouse things you can do of course, and the dice roll as they will, but if I see you I will be able to get to you in that round and have a better than 50/50 chance of stunning you, which takes you out of action for a round, then going from there.
In real game, I wouldn't be trying to solo. I would be stunning you to set up/protect team mates.
I'll jump in here.You will win initiative (you have +16). Not sure what you'll cast, but with all high saves and a cloak, I'll have a better than 50/50 chance of avoiding at least full damage from it. And you picked the level where I get Spell Resistance 23.
When it is my turn I will abundant step and stun you the next round. Save will be 10 + 6 (1/2 Class) + Probably 5 or 6 wisdom at that level, particularly with a 20 point buy...
Meaning you'll have a less than 50/50 chance of not being stunned.
There are cat and mouse things you can do of course, and the dice roll as they will, but if I see you I will be able to get to you in that round and have a better than 50/50 chance of stunning you, which takes you out of action for a round, then going from there.
In real game, I wouldn't be trying to solo. I would be stunning you to set up/protect team mates.
What are you talking about? Are you saying that you would win against a party mage in PVP? Umm...ok. Not sure what you are trying to prove, unless you are in a campaign where you have to kill your fellow team mates.
The point is that the mage contributes more, and most importantly, disables -far- and above what the monk could achieve, which was previously his most touted ability. Moreover he is much more useful to the party overall. So, if your looking to disable your foes, pick a caster. If your looking to break faces, pick any other melee class. Why pick a monk? Cause you want the flavour, but that doesn't mean people aren't right to dislike it.On your tactics, not that it matters since PVP is a silly comparison, but no mage would cast a spell requiring a save on a monk, unless it was an incredibly enhanced DC. So think Invisibility followed by flight and summons, etc. So you can just say- Wizard wins initiative, and the fight.
People see flurry of blows, and I can run fast(monk's movement). They immediately combine the two, but the game mechanics do not allow it.True, but then is the problem with the class or with some peoples interpretation of what they want the class to be, rather than seeing what the class is? How is it that some are certain that the design of the Monk is wrong and not that their preconceived ideas of the Monk is the thing that is in error in the context of this game? What we see is Jason B's idea of the Monk, it is correct for Jason B else he wouldn't have left it the way it is for 4 printings. If you don't like Jason B's Monk there is nothing wrong with what some are doing, rewrite the class. Paizo is unlikely to set the lawyers on you for this.
Musings,
S.
After playing the class they find out all the cool things they envisioned are not possible. The example was one of the hidden traps I was talking about.
The brass knuckles make bypassing DR a lot more reasonable, but some people really want a weaponless character, and the monk should have delivered that without the Amulet of Mighty Fist. Using the Ki points to bypass DR(not just magic) would have been a great idea. I can rewrite the class. Actually I have, but many DM's are only by the book, so rewriting the class is not an option across the board. If it were that easy this thread would not even be here.
Lots of points about the monk I will address belowPoint by point again.
1. Getting behind the defensive line means the enemy has to make a choice, go after the one guy behind you or go after the 3 guys ahead of you. The "Heat Seeking Missile" option is only one choice you could decide to make, mainly focused on getting to casters who are hiding behind a meat shield.
2. If a monk positions well on the heat seeking missile attack, the only thing that gets a full round attack is the caster he went after, who is likely stunned (see below).
If the meat shield is intended to keep people away from the creamy center, it now has to decide if it should go back to the casters (therefore no longer serving the function of keeping the other 3 players off and moving the battle closer the caster and clumping all of the enemies to be vulnerable for area effects) or stay and focus on the other 3 in front, leaving the creamy center to fend for itself.
If a monster was going to grapple you, I would rather they do it near the caster than out in the open. It isn't like they wouldn't try this move anywhere on the battlefield if that was their go to move. The monk has more chance to escape using mobility. I mean half movement for tumble isn't so bad if you move twice as fast as everyone else.
3. Save DC for stunning fist is 10+1/2 your character level + your wisdom. So the save DC is always going to be tough since it is basically 10 + the rate high fort saves increase, + either my primary or secondary modifier. It's a around 50/50 save for a high fort save class and much, much lower for a non-fort based class. Plus you get it enough times a day it isn't something you really worry about "losing".
So my stunning fist has a much better than 50/50 chance of taking the caster out of the round completely. If the big baddies fall back to the caster, I try and back out and let my casters bring on the area effects. If not, flurry of blows myself on the caster in round 2, starting with...
Actually it depends on who you are facing. I would send someone to tango with the monk while I nuked the archers if I as the DM had the correct creatures. Going behind enemy lines alone is often a bad idea by the way.
That is a a building built on quicksand.
You cant say that a fighter or a ranger is a better DPSer and then say they can also be better grapplers too, the fact is fighters and rangers have to make a choice between the two.
I don't know what to tell you. Why don't you make a grappling monk (level 5 or 10, say), and I'll make the fighter/ranger equivalent and we can compare?
Note: Focusing on grappling requires two feats up front and one feat later on. A fighter or ranger can easily spare those feats and still equal a monk in terms of damage (and surpass the monk in other categories).
lol ... sometimes. Ha!
*shakes head*
@Ashiel re: the +5 of the fighter - I was only stating that it was irrelevant to the comparison because the fighter will *always* outdamage the monk ... there was no disagreement in what we were saying. I just didn't want to be bothered by the nit-picks about it because, REGARDLESS of the circumstances, the fighter will win the DPR contest - always on account of the flat, static boons he gets over the monk. The degree of the boon doesn't really matter as, previously stated, the fighter will always out-pace the monk.
I like the breakdown on the fighter *still* being "ok" in social checks where the skills matter more than the ability score - good point and well articulated.
@the thread premise in general: how can we continue forward discussion if combat is to be dismissed out of hand? Part of the complaint is about the short comings of the mechanics in play - so how do you justify ignoring those same problems?
LT's advocating that they are mobile status inflicters (I think anyway), and that's something ... again, better handled by the likes of casters and the bard class frankly, just for being able to affect multiple targets vs. 1 at a time (unless the monk is swarmed with targets within reach for some reason and can *actually* flurry-trip people like crazy). If that's their "role" then the primary combat types do it better again ... because of their higher #'s involved and the mechanics used to place the status effects in play by the monk anyway (ie: it's just straight, melee combat-type rolls to get this going).
So ... even *with* that line of thought, the monk is a sub-par character.
The *best* use of the monk is going to come by maximizing all things SF-based. Why? Because it's sets up a condition of lowered defenses on all targets (often disarms them, too mind you), AND for Monks (unarmed specialists can get there, too, though) opens up a rout to "free hits" right there. As the first strike in a series of blows, the Stun, if successful not only does damage, but lets 2 more full/best attacks rip out on top of that ... against the lowered defense target, too, mind you. It's a good, GOOD thing that the monk does contribute to the team as well. Why? Because it lasts until just before the monk's next round ... so it means that the whole team can pig-pile that poor sucker that fails the SF save and gets himself stunned.
Even if the monk runs up and standard-action stuns a target - it's *still* going to last for a long time (hello, big, nasty, evil critter) that the other PC's can all take advantage of while the monk can position himself for other strikes in the next round (again opening up w/a SF to re-stun and then bring the Medusa to bear).
Honestly, though - that "magic bullet" to fix a LOT of the class is the enchantment called "Guided" and it's a +1 enhancement for a weapon ... that's a good, good, GOOD deal for monks.
@Fighter vs. Monk Grapplers - the fighter wins. The fighter *always* wins in this comparison. In fact, the fighter FULLY wins out over the monk in this given the Weapon Training boons of "unarmed" being able to apply to both striking and grappling as it's all fully "unarmed" in application. He'll out-strike and out-damage the monk. Throwing in armor spikes and the like is just insult to injury. It's a full on, no contest, "monk loses" scenario. Hell ... the fighter can even be a few levels LOWER than the monk and he'll still out perform the monk ... because the fighters have become THAT damn good (finally).
What are you talking about? Are you saying that you would win against a party mage in PVP? Umm...ok. Not sure what you are trying to prove, unless you are in a campaign where you have to kill your fellow team mates.
The point is that the mage contributes more, and most importantly, disables -far- and above what the monk could achieve, which was previously his most touted ability. Moreover he is much more useful to the party overall. So, if your looking to disable your foes, pick a caster. If your looking to break faces, pick any other melee class. Why pick a monk? Cause you want the flavour, but that doesn't mean people aren't right to dislike it.On your tactics, not that it matters since PVP is a silly comparison, but no mage would cast a spell requiring a save on a monk, unless it was an incredibly enhanced DC. So think Invisibility followed by flight and summons, etc. So you can just say- Wizard wins initiative, and the fight.
None of this shows that the monk suck. It could be argued, if we accept your premise, that the wizard is overpowered.
In actual play, I have seen every class do well in many situations and also do poorly in others. I have never seen any character build be ready for anything and everything. I have never seen any caster always win. In fact I have seen casters run out of options.
It should be noted that I work on building encounters that are going to take more than one or two rounds to handle. I also don't always give the party time to rest completely. If they feel the need to rest in the dungeon, I have no problem with wandering monsters disturbing their sleep. I don't do it often but I do it.
The *best* use of the monk is going to come by maximizing all things SF-based. Why? Because it's sets up a condition of lowered defenses on all targets (often disarms them, too mind you), AND for Monks (unarmed specialists can get there, too, though) opens up a rout to "free hits" right there. As the first strike in a series of blows, the Stun, if successful not only does damage, but lets 2 more full/best attacks rip out on top of that ... against the lowered defense target, too, mind you. It's a good, GOOD thing that the monk does contribute to the team as well. Why? Because it lasts until just before the monk's next round ... so it means that the whole team can pig-pile that poor sucker that fails the SF save and gets himself stunned.
This illuminates to me the reason why, in 3.0, monks had a 3/4 BAB. They assumed you would be stunning targets, lowering their ACs. Its like flanking and rogues. Its meant to bridge the gap somewhat (although it of course does not cover the extra attacks a full BAB grants). Obviously stunning is harder to do than flanking, but they might have assumed you would be doing both, since the monk can somersault over opponents with ease.
This, though, also demonstrate my biggest pet peeve with the monk, that Strength has become more important than Wisdom, as it is better to just lay on damage, than to use the stunning mechanic in most cases.
Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
A lot of people on this board play assume the "perfect wizard", which is not say that some spells are not more popular than others and more likely to be on hand, but they forget how capable the wizard is when he doesn't have the right spell, which is not an uncommon occurrence, especially if the adventure you are playing will not let you have a 15 minute adventuring day.
Edit - in fact that is part of playing a wizard is thinking of how the use the not-so-perfect spells for a lot of situations. If they always had the spell they wanted, the game would probably get quite boring for them.
Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
I think the APG, but I am not sure.
@ Speaker I am of the same line of thought as you the critiques cannot be dismissed when trying to "build a better monk"
However, comma, I do not believe that requiring a weapon enhancment to "fix" the class is the right option. If the swap wis for str thing was a class feature available at 1st-2nd level then you might be on the right track.
Also for good or for ill some of us play in "No 3.5 material allowed, if you dont have the book/PDF and get approval then no." games.
Having said that would you restate where that weapon quality is located at so i can try and track down the source
Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
APG but you have to have 5d6 or better sneak attack
I think the APG, but I am not sure.Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
Dastardly Finish needs 5d6 sneak attack.
Ninjaed! Or.. Er.. Rogued!
I think the APG, but I am not sure.Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
Dastardly Finish needs 5d6 sneak attack.
Ninjaed! Or.. Er.. Rogued!
Sorry chief.
Sorry chief.I think the APG, but I am not sure.Hmm... this brings to mind a feat I saw somewhere that lets you Coup de Grace a Stunned enemy.
Where did I see that feat...
Dastardly Finish needs 5d6 sneak attack.
Ninjaed! Or.. Er.. Rogued!
;)