Possibly, but it might not be what they want to play. Which is key here.
True, a well-built monk looks a LOT better than a poorly built monk, but take a player who could build a well-built monk and let him play a better class and they'll make that look better than the monk, probably.
I find that even people who want to play a monk tend to regret it a few levels down the line, assuming the party contains a better melee combatant. Although, yes, a monk is more of a jack of all trades than the fighter or an eidolon or what have you, in my experience watching someone else do ridiculously more damage than you while having a better or comparable AC/CMD gets old for the monk player pretty fast.
I find that even people who want to play a monk tend to regret it a few levels down the line, assuming the party contains a better melee combatant. Although, yes, a monk is more of a jack of all trades than the fighter or an eidolon or what have you, in my experience watching someone else do ridiculously more damage than you while having a better or comparable AC/CMD gets old for the monk player pretty fast.Possibly, but it might not be what they want to play. Which is key here.
True, a well-built monk looks a LOT better than a poorly built monk, but take a player who could build a well-built monk and let him play a better class and they'll make that look better than the monk, probably.
Depends on the player. Some enjoy being the annoying harrier that tumbles, leaps, and teleports acros the battlefield over to the back spellcasters to slap the enemy spellcaster gently on the face with an "unarmed" strike when they decide to get uppity. He can make for an interesting trick fighter. I only wish he was built for better skirmishing.
Depends on the player. Some enjoy being the annoying harrier that tumbles, leaps, and teleports acros the battlefield over to the back spellcasters to slap the enemy spellcaster gently on the face with an "unarmed" strike when they decide to get uppity.
I find that kinda falls apart in practice -- as the monk starts getting up some steam in that area, caster defenses/mobility takes off like crazy. Monsters are worse and monster casters are probably worst of all -- the monk in a game I'm running frequently can't get one of his preferred combat maneuvers to work on some enemies without throwing a natural 20 on the attack.
He can make for an interesting trick fighter. I only wish he was built for better skirmishing.
That I can agree with. I especially wish the monk was built more like a full BAB class that's bad at weapon fighting for some reason than a 3/4 BAB class that gets to pretend it's a full BAB class sometimes -- that the monk can't move and take a single attack at a 'full' base attack really starts to hurt.
And, yeah, you can sort of get around that by using a combat maneuver in that case, but often as the levels pile up there isn't one that you're good at that's helpful.
I think it's like 80-90% of a really cool class that just doesn't QUITE get to where it needs to be to really shine in the ways it seems like it's supposed to.
Sure. Start with:
What's the monk's stealth? Horned devils aren't exactly perception slouches. (Heck, what's it even doing on the ground?)
A surprise round isn't a full round.
I think it'd take pretty charitable circumstances for the monk to surprise the devil at all, and even in that case? He spends the surprise round closing in.
Dire, I stepped through an example with a horned devil. It'd be helpful to the discussion if you pointed out where it went wrong rather than just asserting that it wouldn't work.
well to start with you messed up the stunning fist save DC
also
Stunning Fist (Combat)
You know just where to strike to temporarily stun a foe.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8.
Benefit: You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus, a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). Stunning Fist forces a foe damaged by your unarmed attack to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wis modifier), in addition to dealing damage normally. A defender who fails this saving throw is stunned for 1 round (until just before your next turn). A stunned character can't take actions, loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, and takes a –2 penalty to AC. You may attempt a stunning attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (but see Special), and no more than once per round. Constructs, oozes, plants, undead, incorporeal creatures, and creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned.
Special: A monk receives Stunning Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if he does not meet the prerequisites. A monk may attempt a stunning attack a number of times per day equal to his monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels he has in classes other than monk.
Bolded for emphasis.
You ignored that if you move and then attack you are 3/4 BAB (+12)class so hitting his AC of 35 on the attack you declare that is a stunning fist attack before you roll means you need a total of around +13 to hit in bonuses to get a 50/50 chance of landing the attack. for him to roll a 9 or better to ignore the effects of stunning fist.
Also when he hits you with the spiked chain with his natural 10 ft reach (you know like when you move out of that threatened space to try and hit him) your whopping all good fort save with a lowish con (14) and a +5 cloak you will likely need a 10 or more to resist his DC 27 stunning effect and a +26 to his attack roll means hes going to hit you, unless you are super over geared and have several concealment effects to roll.
And no you cant dimension door and then stun him read dimension door it dosent work that way.
I'm sure other will come along with other examples of the issues facing this
Ohh and do remember the sorcerer in the party with spell perfection just threw a persistent metamagic'ed out flesh to stone with a DC of 37 (see ravingdorks rants for how he gets there as he's doing in in a game currently) which he gets a +8 to his spell pen roll and the demon needs a 19 twice to beat from where the party started the encounter WAY out of melee range.
I think it'd take pretty charitable circumstances for the monk to surprise the devil at all, and even in that case? He spends the surprise round closing in.
Well he could still charge in the surprise round if he got in close enough.
Monks are one of the biggest YMMV classes. They are very flavorful, but some see them lacking in crunch.
Treantmonk's Guide to MonksHuh. It leaded me to d20pfsrd.com showing Treantmonk's Guide to Monks but the rest is blank as if some ogre ate the content.
I couldn't open it in Firefox, but Chrome worked, so try a different browser.
Strength and Con aren't that great. But, unarmed is finessed. He's getting his bonuses to hit from Dex, not Strength. His hit points aren't great, but that's okay, he's not a front line fighter. His damage comes entirely from his monk unarmed fighting.
As I pointed out, the Monk has a much higher Perception, a much higher Initiative, a much higher Stealth, and a much higher move. The only character who is going to be evenly vaguely aware of what's going on is going to be the Rogue - if the Rogue is playing point position alongside the Monk.
And something you're overlooking is that the Monk isn't getting just one attempt at stunning fist. He can attempt a stunning fist for every attack he makes (a considerable number of attacks considering that he's using stealth to move into combat and he's got a monk's robes and boots of haste and blowing a ki point). So, the Devil has a 50% chance of not being stunned on the first attack, a 25% chance of not being stunned on either of the first two attacks, etc.
And, since this is a surprise round and the monk has a much higher initiative, the Monk is likely to get two full actions before the Devil even gets to act - he could use that second full round action to dimn door/tumble into safety.In the unlikely possibility that he doesn't make his stealth roll, he can abort his action and run back to safety early.
A few things.
1. While having a +4 advantage is very, very nice. It's not completely reliable over the course of multiple rolls. Which you will be making.2. How are you getting in 2 full round actions on a creature before it can act? That's simply not possible. If you beat his perception, you get a surprise round. That's a standard or move action. I assume you would use it to move into range (assuming this is actually easy to accomplish). Then if you win init you get your full action before him. He still gets his turn before you get another full round.
3. What kind of environment are you fighting this Horned Devil in? An Int 14, Wis 22 creature has some brains. Is he a blissfully unaware Devil who takes strolls through the forest alone? If that's the case, sure you can probably easily sneak up on him. But if he has companions, traps, detection gear, or anything else- then this isn't so easy. Or hell, what if he is just flying through the air? How do you sneak up on him then? There is no cover in the sky.
4. You cannot make more than one stunning fist attempt per round. So even if everything goes swimming for you, it still fails 60% of the time. And then your not-a-front-line-fighter is smack dab in the middle of close combat with a Horned Devil. Alone. And it's his turn.
Now I will grant that if you are able to land a stun on him (if you opt for blind or something else, he would just teleport away), denying him a round of action is probably good enough to set yourself up and the rest of the 16th level party up to easily take him out. However, this brings me to number 5.
5. A Horned Devil is probably one of the easier things for this sneak and stun strategy to work on. A single CR 16 creature is really not that difficult for an optimized 16th level party to take out. How does this work out against an actual "challenging" encounter that is a few above your APL? Not to mention that many of the things you will face will have better perception (possibly with scent, tremorsense, blindsight/sense, etc), or better fort saves, or have outright immunity to stunning fist, or have higher initiative, or not be completely alone, etc.. etc..
I'd still play one just to beat the crap out of monsters with my fists.
I'd still play one just to beat the crap out of monsters with my fists.
Unarmed strike from a monk allows you to beat monsters to death with any part of your body. It can get pretty weird or outright nasty.
A couple of quick points
1.) This is a Devil. He's not exactly going to be frollicking under the sunlight/smelling the daisies. He's likely to be in a deep, dark, dank place - like underground, where, due to the cramped quarters, flying isn't likely to be a constant activity.
Okay, so he is securely tucked away in his dark underground safehold? I hope you didn't fight anything on your way to him. He might hear it. I hope you didn't trip any of those traps in the underground. He'd probably hear them. I hope you didn't set off that permanent alarm spell right outside his room. He'd definitely hear that. Oh and I hope someone cast darkvision on you for this dark place. Because if you were using any light, he'd definitely see that.
2.) A stealth vs. perception roll once per round is reasonable. More often than that starts to look like the GM trying to nerf stealth. About two stealth vs. perception rolls seems fair to me and one of them is going to be at a big disadvantage for the perception roll since the monk won't be close (due to his high movement rate).
Assuming there is nothing else in this underground dungeon to tip him off, you are still making two stealth rolls, an initiative roll, an attack roll, and he is making a single saving throw. I hope you don't ever roll poorly, or he ever rolls really well (or even him just not sucking on the save). Otherwise you are in for a world of hurt.
3.) I did misremember how many stunning attacks can be made per round and what kind of actions can be done during surprise. Assuming the monk makes his stealth roll, he'll be able to make a standard action (perhaps an attack) or a move before the initiative roll (which he'll likely win).
Once again, while you may have the edge for each of these rolls on an individual basis (except the all important saving throw), you are really hoping that each and everyone of these will go off without a hitch.
4.) Not everything is a nail and the monk isn't armed with only a hammer. That is to say, this sneak attack tactic won't work against everything and the monk has other tactics he can use in those cases.
What other tactics are you going to be using other than stunning fist? You don't have any real strength to be a damage dealing threat in combat, and I never found combat maneuvers to be that easy (let alone usable) at this high of level.
This theoretical one-on-one combat against the devil is interesting but it does have two problems:
1) What is the monk build? Each build can do different things and just throwing around numbers really doesn't give us an accurate picture.
2) The monk should have a difficult time against the devil, as should any other single character. While some might find it easier than others, the CR is based on a 4-character party. This particular battle doesn't really give us any real information on the effectiveness of the monk.
The horned devil is one nasty devil. I just had one in a battle against my players and he had three of them stunned (which automatically disarms them too). So the dual wielding paladin, the two-handed fighter, and the sword-and-board fighter were all useless for a couple of rounds. To make it worse, once they were stunned, he bull rushed them away from their weapons. It was up to the wizard and the archer to keep the devil busy while the party recovered from their stuns. 2 rounds is a long time to not be attacking the devil with your biggest hitters. (The wizard had already been using his spells against another caster so he was running low on his most powerful options).
While the devil wasn't alone, he was the deciding factor in the battle. The party eventually won but it wasn't easy by any means.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A commoner in a game once rolled three twenties killing a monk, QED commoners are stronger then monks. Your move, Lilith.
( Really though you guys are arguing with Lilith who has made a posting career of making one super extreme example and basing their entire argument around it, come on )
Monks are bad for a lot of reasons. They have a lot of "eh" abilities that are supposed to combine together to make a "good" class, but none of the abilities really combine at all. Some, like super speed and flurry, can't be used together at all. Beyond that they're the most MAD class in the game and, bizarrely enough for the class based on asceticism, need more magical items then anyone else. They have no role in the game that they can actively fulfill - they aren't front liners, they lack the damage to be major damage dealers, they have no spells, they don't have access to "thief" skills, they can't effectively harry, etc, etc, etc.
To top it all off they're boring. "I full attack" is sad enough when you're supposed to be a master of martial weaponry like the fighter, but the monk is born and bred in martial arts and fantastic fighting styles. But he doesn't have any!
To put it another way, to quote from EN World:
"Why be a 3.x monk?"
"Because you want to be a great, powerful and wise kung fu master who can trip, grapple, stun, and disarm his way around the battlefield, moving faster than anyone else and kill casters so they don't threaten your teammates.
You won't actually get to do it, but that's a separate issue."
|
This theoretical one-on-one combat against the devil is interesting but it does have two problems:
1) What is the monk build? Each build can do different things and just throwing around numbers really doesn't give us an accurate picture.
2) The monk should have a difficult time against the devil, as should any other single character. While some might find it easier than others, the CR is based on a 4-character party. This particular battle doesn't really give us any real information on the effectiveness of the monk.
The horned devil is one nasty devil. I just had one in a battle against my players and he had three of them stunned (which automatically disarms them too). So the dual wielding paladin, the two-handed fighter, and the sword-and-board fighter were all useless for a couple of rounds. To make it worse, once they were stunned, he bull rushed them away from their weapons. It was up to the wizard and the archer to keep the devil busy while the party recovered from their stuns. 2 rounds is a long time to not be attacking the devil with your biggest hitters. (The wizard had already been using his spells against another caster so he was running low on his most powerful options).
While the devil wasn't alone, he was the deciding factor in the battle. The party eventually won but it wasn't easy by any means.
+1
It is a 4 player game. Everyone has a role.
If the Monk only succeed on stunning fist 25% of the time, that means 25% of the time he has removed something from battle a round, which is an eternity in combat, while setting up to flurry them on the next round before they can attack.
The monks mobility makes them perfect for scouting or flanking.
The monks high saves make them either the class most likely to survive or the class most likely to be able to use the gold on something other than a cloak of resistance. And you are going to be immune to most diseases and poisons soon enough.
Everyone keeps talking about AC...You get an AC bonus every 4 levels plus your wisdom. In addition you can spend the money you would use on armor on rings/amulets/potions of owls wisdom, etc...to give to bumps as needed. In my experience the monks AC is right there with the fighter, only without having the movement/armor check penalties even if they don't throw a lot in Dex.
4 skills isn't bad per level isn't bad.
If you want to be a tank, play a tank class. I agree the monk isn't a tank class. It is a utility class. It fills different roles as needed.
It isn't going to always outshine the others, but its survivability and versatility appeal to a lot of players who prefer to always be useful than to be all win/all fail
I remember playing a monk as my very first character ever in AD&D and being excited about the fact that I had rolled awesome for my stats.
At max Level ("Grandmaster of Flowers") this Monk could do insane damage with a decent death attack thrown in.
But getting there was nearly impossible. When the Magic-User learned his first Fireball, the Monk learned to Feign Death - which was important for him due to a terrible armor class and abysmal hit points (worse than Magic-Users with a normal Con)...
I left him behind for a Dwarven Waraxe Fighter with a natural rolled 18°° Strength - day and night, I can tell you.
While the Pathfinder Monk is nowhere near as gimped as the AD&D Monk it is a class that is hard to play good, needs to be optimized and relies on some GM fiat to perform on par to Fighter/Ranger/Barbarians which means only the Rogue is strictly worse off.
If the Monk only succeed on stunning fist 25% of the time, that means 25% of the time he has removed something from battle a round, which is an eternity in combat, while setting up to flurry them on the next round before they can attack.
Even assuming for 25% which can be rather liberal with the monk's power, that still means 3/4 times you spend your turn doing nothing. That sucks. Remember this, it comes up again!
The monks mobility makes them perfect for scouting or flanking.
Get a rogue, buy a speed booster. Boom, instant monk.
The monks high saves make them either the class most likely to survive or the class most likely to be able to use the monk on something other than a cloak of resistance. And you are going to be immune to most diseases and poisons soon enough.
Everyone keeps talking about AC...You get an AC bonus every 4 levels plus your wisdom. In addition you can spend the money you would use on armor on rings/amulets/potions of owls wisdom, etc...to give to bumps as needed. In my experience the monks AC is right there with the fighter, only without having the movement/armor check penalties even if they don't throw a lot in Dex.
People aren't really talking about AC.
Here's the problem: AC matters at level 1, where attacks can come close to being a one hit kill, and AC has a good chance of changing that. As you go up in level, however, attack, bonuses skyrocket, and more and more it's assured that the first attack, then the second attack, and potentially even the third attack is going to hit. Monks start with low AC when it matters, and only make it up when it doesn't. As for extra money, you don't have any. You don't! Your "weapon" - the necklace - costs dramatically more then any actual weapon does. Woops.
4 skills isn't bad per level isn't bad.
If you want to be a tank, play a tank class. I agree the monk isn't a tank class. It is a utility class. It fills different roles as needed.
But they don't have "skill monkey" skills. They don't have fighter damage. They don't have ranger/paladin utility. They don't have divine caster heals and buffs. They don't have arcane caster controls and game changers. And by this I don't mean "they do it poorly," I mean "it's nonexistent."
Let's take at a class that is a "jack-of-all-trades" for comparison: the bard.
The bard has 6 skills and a lot more useful class skills, but more then that he had Bardic Knack, which added 1/2 his level to all skills in 3.x, and in Pathfinder he has Versatile Performer, which is slightly more specialized but goes under the same idea. He has arcane spells that could heal, buff, debuff, and do a fair amount of controlling. He could boost himself and do a fair amount of damage, too. He wasn't as skill-monkey as the rogue, he wasn't as damage dealy as the fighter, he wasn't as heal-buff as the divine caster, he wasn't as controlling as the wizard, but he could do each of those a fair amount.
See, here's the thing. Monks don't have a niche. They don't have a role. And they don't have utility. Unlike the bard, they can't full different roles. They lack the versatility ultimately needed to be the "jack-of-all-trades." They are the jack of no trades. More then that, the bard has things only a bard can do with his bard song. The monk doesn't have that. Every "monk" ability the monk has is a copy of another feat, a spell, or another class' ability.
It isn't going to always outshine the others, but its survivability and versatility appeal to a lot of players who prefer to always be useful than to be all win/all fail
Remember that "3/4ths chance to fail utterly and be useless" I mentioned? Yeah, that sounds a lot like win/all fail to me. Only with dramatically less winning. Unless you mean WINNING!
|
|
Actually, I wish Monks got Wisdom to attacks and damage with unarmed strikes and monk weapons, instead of Strength. That would make them less MAD, and boost their to hit and damage.
Also, it would be nice if they could spend a ki point to flurry after taking a Move action, or at the end of a charge.
Ah Cirno, you're so sweet when you ignore facts in your spotlight rants. Brass knuckles. :)Your "weapon" - the necklace - costs dramatically more then any actual weapon does. Woops.
A single footnote in a non-core book that's highly controversial and to my knowledge has yet to be FAQ'd?
I am aware of it. I'm not ignoring it. But it remains a single footnote in a non-core book that's highly controversial and, at least to my knowledge, no developer has stepped in to say if it works the way some people think it does.
|
Ah Cirno, you're so sweet when you ignore facts in your spotlight rants. Brass knuckles. :)Your "weapon" - the necklace - costs dramatically more then any actual weapon does. Woops.
A single footnote in a non-core book that's highly controversial and to my knowledge has yet to be FAQ'd?
I am aware of it. I'm not ignoring it. But it remains a single footnote in a non-core book that's highly controversial and, at least to my knowledge, no developer has stepped in to say if it works the way some people think it does.
Actually, brass knuckles are from APG, and there's no controversy about them as currently written.
They did appear first in Adventurer's Armory, and they were wonky as written there, but they got reprinted in APG with changes.
But it's refreshing to know that you are discussing PF rules without having read the APG.
But relying on or using brass knuckles goes counter to every image or concept I have of a monk. It is still a valid point, but I hate when classes are tied to very specific pieces of equipment to allow them to continue to function. 4E has plenty of those examples.
Yeah, Brass Knuckles - the savior of Monks everywhere.
Now you can have a cool old master of martial arts, jumping, speeding, kicking and striking like hell - provided he has affixed his brass knuckles beforehand like a 2nd rate street mugger.
|
|
But relying on or using brass knuckles goes counter to every image or concept I have of a monk. It is still a valid point, but I hate when classes are tied to very specific pieces of equipment to allow them to continue to function. 4E has plenty of those examples.
I agree it's not the most elegant fix out there, but it works, and it doesn't require a rewrite of Monk class.
One could argue that Rogues are tied to TWF and light weapons in a similar degree (yes, you can use a different weapon combo, but you're shooting yourself in the foot).
And yes, I would for one love a rewrite of Monk. Sadly, his legacy 3.5 design is so awkward that re-doing the class from scratch would likely throw any backwards compatibility out of the window.
|
|
The Monk is a class everyone likes to think would be good to play but pon reading the class soon move onto to something else. Just reading the Monk page has youscreaming in frustration. Seriously, what was anyone thinkng when they designed it?
3/4 BAB? WTF?! They are a Rogue/Bard type fighter and not a main hitter like Ranger/Barb/Pally/Fighter?
D8 hp - why?! Again, they are dumped in the Bard/Rogue area and not a proper fighting type class?
These two facts alone are just stupid and such an easy fix. SOmeone actually looked at the Monk and thought 'Whoa, hold on man, we can't make them with hp and BAB similar to a Fighter, that's crazy!
4 skill points per lvl - So, hold on, you have dumped me in the Rogue/Bard area, given me less skills (especially as I cannot afford to have bonus Int...in fact I am so MAD I probably lose 2 points there) I can't do spell casting or songs to help the party, I can't backstab or or disarm magical traps.
They are MAD - like the Pally used to be.
It seems to me, all classes got some love except the Monk when Pathfinder came out and he has been left in the dust.
Even looking at the class abilities as he lvls was seriously underwhelming - Immune to Disease 2 lvls later than the Pally. 2 Ki points to heal his lvl of hp as a STANDARD Action?! Hell, that could have been a free action and 1 Ki point and I would have been unsure if it was worth using.
I am not a fan of comparing one class to another because different playstyles can dictate what you want to play, but even so, I cannot help but look at the Paladin in comparison - mainly because the one thing people say is great about the monk is his saves....really? Looks to me that the Pally saves against Will and Fort (you know, the two dangerous ones) are the same, the Monk gets an advantage on Reflex....but wait, that does not count the Pally Cha bonus which makes Fort and Will get better and then puts Dex close to on par.
LoH early on compared to a 2 Ki crappy heal later.
You can compare Monk lvling skills with other classes to, and each time you will be underwhelmed.
First things I would do if I were rewriting the monk is move to d10 hp, full BAB and remove one of the stat requirements.
I would also seriously consider the Monk being able to move and full attack - afterall mobility is his key thing is it not? Look at me! I can move 90ft and punch once.
I would probably make it so that for every 10ft bonus speed he gets he can move that far while still making his full attack (so 10ft + 5ft step at 4th lvl) or perhaps his standard 30ft movement allows for full attack. Perhaps not this in addition to BAB and hp changes but still something I would consider.
|
But relying on or using brass knuckles goes counter to every image or concept I have of a monk. It is still a valid point, but I hate when classes are tied to very specific pieces of equipment to allow them to continue to function. 4E has plenty of those examples.I agree it's not the most elegant fix out there, but it works, and it doesn't require a rewrite of Monk class.
One could argue that Rogues are tied to TWF and light weapons in a similar degree (yes, you can use a different weapon combo, but you're shooting yourself in the foot).
And yes, I would for one love a rewrite of Monk. Sadly, his legacy 3.5 design is so awkward that re-doing the class from scratch would likely throw any backwards compatibility out of the window.
These are the times where I wonder if 4e has that part right. The part where a class is designed with a clear role. Yes this is distasteful to many players, including myself. Yes this is MMO-ish. But in the end, I think it's more fair to players who might not know exactly how things will turn out, but at level 7, they discover their choice ends up being a trap.
Flankers and skirmishers are a fine role, but monks definitely do not have the edge on that role. I'd argue a ranger or fighting rogue can do that just as well.
So we all know fighters are DPS kings. Paladins are lesser fighters that gain massive bonuses against evil, plus with a bit of divine magic. Barbarians I'm not sure exactly, but they have a crap load of HP and some DR options, and they still do a lot of damage. Rangers are more of the scount/skirmish types and do really well in certain environments.
Maybe monks should be combat maneuver kings. I'm open to any number of things, but as it is the monk is only moderately effective at certain things, and those are things that other classes can do as well.
|
|
Yeah, Brass Knuckles - the savior of Monks everywhere.
Now you can have a cool old master of martial arts, jumping, speeding, kicking and striking like hell - provided he has affixed his brass knuckles beforehand like a 2nd rate street mugger.
Yeah, I appreciate the mechanical solution it offers, but damn it's a flavor killer.
Makes me wish for an optional system that allowed monks to get appropriate enchantments on themselves that much more, to let the barehanders be barehanders.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Y'all stop bad mouthing Monk. Monk never did anything to disparage any o' you!!! Monk just nicely doing his thing (which is a little of a bunch of stuff) and everyone gotta come on in and stomp and crap on his flower garden. Shame! Shame on all youse that hating on Monk!
*weep*
I love you Monk, ignore them.
Aren't there enough monk-bashing threads in this forum yet?
Do we need one per week?
Treantmonk's Guide to MonksHuh. It leaded me to d20pfsrd.com showing Treantmonk's Guide to Monks but the rest is blank as if some ogre ate the content.
That's because instead of actually hosting the content in HTML, it's an embedded Google document. Ze Goog. You'll probably need to enable scripting from google.com in order for it to work.
Treantmonk's guides are really good. It's a shame the d20pfsrd folks don't just host it locally. Maybe Treantmonk wants to be able to go back and edit them or something.
|
|
I dunno...many of them sure read like Monk bashingAren't there enough monk-bashing threads in this forum yet?
Do we need one per week?Most of them aren't monk bashing so much as "won't somebody please help the monk?"
Hopefully Ultimate Combat will ease that pain.
Yeah, there are those too. And the ones that are all, "Why is the monk in the game? It's not fantasy. Please stop getting Asian germs in my game."
Those tend to be depressing. :(
|
|
I dunno...many of them sure read like Monk bashingAren't there enough monk-bashing threads in this forum yet?
Do we need one per week?Most of them aren't monk bashing so much as "won't somebody please help the monk?"
Hopefully Ultimate Combat will ease that pain.
Yeah, there are those too. And the ones that are all, "Why is the monk in the game? It's not fantasy. Please stop getting Asian germs in my game."
Those tend to be depressing. :(
mmhmm *nods*
Y'all stop bad mouthing Monk. Monk never did anything to disparage any o' you!!! Monk just nicely doing his thing (which is a little of a bunch of stuff) and everyone gotta come on in and stomp and crap on his flower garden. Shame! Shame on all youse that hating on Monk!
*weep*
I love you Monk, ignore them.
I love the Monk from a Fictional Positioning standpoint always have.
Although until the article in Dragon "He's Got a Lot to Kick About" from the 80's which rebuilt the 1ed monk with at least d6's couldn't survive playing one.
From the Mechanical Positioning standpoint the Inquistor is a better Monk: reskin them and they do the job well.
The spells tends towards buffs/protections including expeditious "charge", stealth enhancement, detection, and healing. Has the ability to make his unarmed strikes magical plus the Bane/greater bane addons to make sure the enemy feels it, and gets all the cleric attack/dam buff spells. Protection domain grants save bonuses. travel for movement enhancement including ignoring terrain. Gets the ability to evasion fort and will saves.
Ohh and have more skill points can use reach weapons like the spear all the exotic crossbows so they do lose the monks weapon selection which is flavor wise cool even if the Kama is a sickle in RL and should be one in the game. :)
What I am upset about was Paizo clearly and intentionally reworked the paladin to make them less MAD and ability cogent (IE the abilities work together well) and didn't do the same for the monk. As if all this critique about the monk is somehow new to PF the shortcomings, the MAD, the ability incongruity.
Straight Up one of Paizo's blunders. Especially because you can turn the page and see the formula of how to resolve a class people had complaints about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Y'all stop bad mouthing Monk. Monk never did anything to disparage any o' you!!! Monk just nicely doing his thing (which is a little of a bunch of stuff) and everyone gotta come on in and stomp and crap on his flower garden. Shame! Shame on all youse that hating on Monk!
*weep*
I love you Monk, ignore them.
Alternate solution: Paizo helps monks.
|
|
What I am upset about was Paizo clearly and intentionally reworked the paladin to make them less MAD and ability cogent (IE the abilities work together well) and didn't do the same for the monk. As if all this critique about the monk is somehow new to PF the shortcomings, the MAD, the ability incongruity.
Seconded.
I absolutely adore what they did with the paladin. I've had a LOT of fun playing one, and it offered a good bit of flexibility even under a low point buy.
I really do wish the monk got the same attention.
What I am upset about was Paizo clearly and intentionally reworked the paladin to make them less MAD and ability cogent (IE the abilities work together well) and didn't do the same for the monk. As if all this critique about the monk is somehow new to PF the shortcomings, the MAD, the ability incongruity.
Seconded.
I absolutely adore what they did with the paladin. I've had a LOT of fun playing one, and it offered a good bit of flexibility even under a low point buy.
I really do wish the monk got the same attention.
As do I. I think I am going to just copy paste the quote of mine above into every "Monk is Bad" thread. It really is sort of what it boils down to after all the posturing on the respective sides is done.
The monk didnt do anything
Paizo didn't do anything and thats the issue.
I love monk threads.
*Plops down on the couch next to TOZ.
I done hand me the popcorn.