*Plops down a comfy couch beside Gorbacz, then a cooler full of beer. Passes the bag of popcorn.*
you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that.Okay, so you think that if the Monk can't do good damage, then it's going to be ineffective.
That's like saying that if a Wizard casts Hold Monster instead of Fireball, he's going to be ineffective.
Your 11+ years makes you a noob in DnD.
But a Wizard casting Fireball instead of HM *is* ineffective. :D
Oh well. Round Two: LT vs. Ashiel. And I ran out of popcorn and beer....
*has also brought the pizza*
*has also brought the pizza**Plops down a comfy couch beside Gorbacz, then a cooler full of beer. Passes the bag of popcorn.*
you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that.Okay, so you think that if the Monk can't do good damage, then it's going to be ineffective.
That's like saying that if a Wizard casts Hold Monster instead of Fireball, he's going to be ineffective.
Your 11+ years makes you a noob in DnD.
But a Wizard casting Fireball instead of HM *is* ineffective. :D
Oh well. Round Two: LT vs. Ashiel. And I ran out of popcorn and beer....
Wings, anyone?
Let's set our conditions, so that someone doesn't strain their back moving those goalposts.
Fighter has STR 22 (18 base, 2 stat bumps, +2 STR belt) and DEX 14, and is level 8. He has Power Attack. His Weapon Training at level 5 went into his Greatsword.
He has a +2 Flaming Greatsword. (18,350 GP)
He has +1 Full Spiked Plate with a Locked Gauntlet (We will ignore the fact that a locked gauntlet is all but impossible to use with anything but a fixed grip one handed weapon. Reality isn't materially important.) (2,708 GP)
He has a Ring of Protection +1 (+1 deflection bonus) (2,000 GP)
He has an Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (2,000 GP)
AC is 10+10+2+1+1=24
Fighter has 25,058 GP of stuffs.
His CMB is easy to figure out: 8+6-4=+10
Monk has a STR of 20 (18 base, STR-DEX belt), a DEX of 18 (15 base, +1 Stat Bump, DEX belt), a WIS of 14. He is level 7. He has Dodge, Combat Expertise, Improved Unarmed Strike, Belier's Bite, Power Attack, Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike, and Improved Grapple. Monk also has Threatening Defender as a trait.
Monk is under a barkskin spell (self cast) for +3 Natural AC and has a friend cast Mage Armor (at 7th level, it's a day long spell.) He chugged a potion of shield of faith.
Monk's gear:
Belt of +2/+2 DEX/STR = 10,000 GP,
Pearl of Power (so his friend the Wizard can cast a 7+ hour long Mage Armor spell) = 1,000 GP
Potion of Shield of Faith: 50 GP
Monk has 11,050 GP of Stuffs.
Monk has an AC of 10+4+2+1+1+2*+3+2=29, 27 without Combat Expertise.
Fighter's CMD versus the initial grapple is:
10+5*+6+2+1-4-2=15 (-4 for not having both hands empty, -2 for having charged; BAB is -3 for Power Attack)
Monk's CMB to initiate the grapple is: 6*+5+1+2=+14. BAB is -1 for Combat Expertise.
So, unless the Monk rolls a 1, the charging, Power Attacking fighter with the locked guantlet and spiked armor gets grappled.
Fighter's CMB once the grapple is in place: 8+6-4=+10. Or +7 if he Power Attacks. His CMD rises to 10+8+6+2+1-4=23, 20 if he Power Attacks.
Monk's CMD once the grapple is in place is: 10+6*+5+4+2+1+1+2*+2+2=36, for modified BAB, DEX WIS, Monk AC bonus, Dodge feat, Combat Expertise, Improved Grapple, and finally, Deflection potion.
So, Fighter is Grappled. In order for the fighter to take control of the grapple, he has to beat a 36 or higher while rolling 1d20+10. Instead of doing this, the fighter can can make one attack with his armor spikes as a Standard Action while grappled, as a light weapon. Not iterative. One attack.
Fighter gets to roll to hit, doing 1d6+3 damage. 1d6+6 Power Attacking. Monk has an AC of 29 for this initial one. Let's assume that the armor spikes aren't enchanted as weapons, and they can't be masterwork weapons on their own. He likely didn't blow a feat on them for Weapon Focus, and he didn't spend Armor Training on them when he could put it on his primary weapon of Flaming Awesome.
Even so, let's assume there's a +1 to hit in there that I've overlooked. He's attacking at -2 for being grappled. 8+6+1-2=+13, or +10 with Power Attack. He needs to equal a 29, so that's either a roll of 16 (25% chance to hit) or 19 (10% chance to hit).
The Monk has to roll to maintain the Grapple. He has to beat a CMD of 23 (assuming the fighter isn't going to Power Attack, 20 if the fighter does)
The Monk's CMB to maintain, once the grapple is initiated, is +20 versus a CMD of 20 or 23. He stops using Combat Expertise, because it's more important to maintain the grapple than to avoid being hit. So his bonus goes to +15, and there's a +5 to maintain. His CMB drops to 35 and his AC drops to 27.
So, Monk maintains the Grapple (most likely). This now becomes a race: Who runs out of hit points first?
Monk does 1d8+5 damage, plus 1d4 bleed per round. He hits 90% of the time. His expected damage is 4.5+2.5=7+5=12 points per round, or 10.8 points per round including his chance of blowing the grapple.
Fighter does 1d6+3 if he wants any chance whatsoever of A) hitting and B) the Monk letting go of the Grapple. He's attacking at +13, against an AC of 27. He's doing 6.5 damage per round, and hits 35% of the time. Or 2.3 damage per round.
68 hit points divided by 10.8 is 7 rounds to Fighter at 0 hit points.
49 hit points divided by 2.6 is 22 rounds to the Monk at 0 hit points. The Monk's shield of faith potion will be running out a round or two before Fighter dies, which will translate into the Monk taking about 7 more damage.
Who won the fight?
OK, now we're ready :)
you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that.Okay, so you think that if the Monk can't do good damage, then it's going to be ineffective.
That's like saying that if a Wizard casts Hold Monster instead of Fireball, he's going to be ineffective.
Your 11+ years makes you a noob in DnD.
You may wish to get glasses, as I can only surmise that your vision is blurry from your post. Since there's no command that allows me to expand the size of the text in my posts, perhaps bolding the text will help you comprehend it.
Given your build, and its low strength, I don't really believe you'd have much luck stunning or grappling, and you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that. I'm just not very impressed.
To clarify, I noted that I believed - IN ADDITION - to your lacking on control based techniques that you would also be incapable of dealing decent damage as a fallback. See, no where did I say that damage was what was important, but that you would have difficulties in all those areas.
See a wizard can forgo dealing damage and do something like hit the devil with dimensional anchor to lock down its mobility. Or it could have used magic circle against evil and assisted the entire party, or the wizard could have blinded the creature with a cloud spell, or attempted to turn the turn the critter to stone or something (as long as we're banking on it biffing its fortitude save, why not put a nail in the coffin, right?). Or the wizard could buy some time and try to spirit the party away if the horned devil is beyond them.
Your entire hope of fighting the horned devil basically relied on you getting the drop on the horned devil and then charging in while he was flat-footed and then smacking him with a single low-damage strike which may not even pierce his DR, and then having him biff a saving throw that he has a better than 50% chance to save against, and a miss or failure indicates that you are going to get full-attacked hard on the critter's turn.
Meanwhile, if said critter merely has Combat Reflexes, he gets his AoO against you even while flat-footed and uses his superior reach to attempt to smack you with his chain, or sunder your weapon if you're using a weapon to pierce his DR, or attempt to trip you (which he has a +26 to Trip), or he could just slap you and then you have to make a DC 27 save or be stunned for 1d4 rounds. Holy crap, he stole your trick!
EDIT: Also, if he swapped Vital Strike for Ability Focus, the DC on the stun becomes 29. That way he basically gets a chance to stun on every hit (a big chance too!) and he doesn't even have to use his turn to do it. Nice.
Given your build, and its low strength, I don't really believe you'd have much luck stunning or grappling, and you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that. I'm just not very impressed.What does strength and stunning fist have to do with each other??
Hitting.
Given your build, and its low strength, I don't really believe you'd have much luck stunning or grappling, and you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that. I'm just not very impressed.What does strength and stunning fist have to do with each other??
As much as strength has to do with spellcasting. In otherwords, nothing. However, others have been pointing out how statistically you can't rely on stunning fist entirely. Heck, your enemy might even be immune to stunning (such as being undead). Where does that leave you when you 1 trick doesn't work?
Perhaps I was not grammatically clear. Let me try another way. Given your low strength, your ability to fall back to damage or combat maneuvers such as grappling is minimal, if your stunning fist does not land.
Is that clearer?
EDIT:
Hitting.
I was assuming that the monk burnt a feat to get Weapon Finesse to apply the high Dex modifier to hit. Otherwise it would just be stupid. :P
That typo brought me more joy than this whole thread.
Haha. Yes, we should all take Weapon Fineese! That feat is the best. :3
Also, anyone else notice that instead of actually addressing any of my examples or commenting on my offer to run a game for him/her online, he/she instead called me a noob and tried to strawman like a champ?
Also, I'm curious. Exactly what about playing this system (3.x/d20/PF) since its conception 11 years ago would make me such a D&D noob anyway? Is it because my preferred version, and the one I'm most comfortable with, isn't the one that launched over 30 years ago and has virtually no bearing mechanically on the more modern incarnations?
EDIT: The very incarnations that we are discussing, actually.
Rather than compare monks to home ruled campaigns, how do they compare to the Bestiary and NPCs they need to fight? If we change the feats, gear, spell-like abilities, etc of the opponents, then obviously things will be very different for all classes. What are the benchmarks we need to focus on if we use just what's written? Can the monk deal with that? Can it be done with just the Core or must you go beyond that? Does the monk do better in some campaigns and not others simply by virtue of the opponents? Does the monk work better against several weaker opponents or can he do fine against one bigger one?
To those claiming monks own because they can survive a monster wailing on them, my question is thus:
If the monk isn't doing much damage, what's stopping the monster fro ignoring them and stomping over to everyone else?
As for the vaunted mobility? Boom. 5,500 GP is how much it costs to replace a monk.
I keep seeing "No see roles don't matter." "Roles are training wheels!" But I still don't see what the monk gives to the group.
Stop the PVP nonsense because it's nonsense because I've yet to see a game literally turn into just 1 vs 1 arena fights. What do the two classes give to the group.
Fighters can dish out massive damage and can take a good amount of hits. Monks can take some of the hits but they cannot do the damage.
Monks are about equal to the fighter at maneuvers. However, maneuvers very quickly stop mattering as you go up in level, until you hit the point where everything is either immune, flying, or can teleport at will.
But it's unfair to compare them to full BAB classes, I'm told. So what about the 3/4ths bab? We'll skip the spell casters since hahahaha. So how about the rogue? Well, the rogue overwhelmingly beats the monk at skills. And the rogue can do an awesome amount of damage as well - neck and neck with a non-Zen Archer monk unless that monk pours on the strength, as I recall. Oh, and the rogue has UMD as a class skill. Woops! There goes that.
Once again - what does the monk do? Being able to "survive a lot" is meaningless because there's nothing forcing the monster to attack you instead of anyone else. His mobility is replaced by items. His stunning fist requires him to focus entirely in wisdom to even have a chance to land - and even then it's far more likely to fail against equal level opponents.
Look at the suggestions. "Well, he can flank." Literally anyone can flank. Yes, wizards and sorcerers can flank too! As can commoners! So well done there!
Stop whinging about roles and start talking about niche. What does the monk provide that other classes do not? What's the essential "monkness" that makes it a better choice over other classes?
Stop whinging about roles and start talking about niche. What does the monk provide that other classes do not? What's the essential "monkness" that makes it a better choice over other classes?
What do you want from the monk? Obviously those who like it have found a place that it fills in their games. They aren't looking for massive damage, instead they are looking for combat maneuvers. They aren't looking to go toe-to-toe, they are looking to be more versatile. They aren't looking for tons of hit points, they are looking at not being hit in the first place.
The monk, like any other character, will fill the niche that the players want it to fill for their games. You don't think the monk can do that in your games and I'm willing to bet that no one will ever convince you otherwise. That doesn't mean that the monk can't be a playable class though, in someone else's campaign.
|
Also, anyone else notice that instead of actually addressing any of my examples or commenting on my offer to run a game for him/her online, he/she instead called me a noob and tried to strawman like a champ?
Also, I'm curious. Exactly what about playing this system (3.x/d20/PF) since its conception 11 years ago would make me such a D&D noob anyway? Is it because my preferred version, and the one I'm most comfortable with, isn't the one that launched over 30 years ago and has virtually no bearing mechanically on the more modern incarnations?
EDIT: The very incarnations that we are discussing, actually.
You gave examples?
Rather than compare monks to home ruled campaigns, how do they compare to the Bestiary and NPCs they need to fight? If we change the feats, gear, spell-like abilities, etc of the opponents, then obviously things will be very different for all classes. What are the benchmarks we need to focus on if we use just what's written? Can the monk deal with that? Can it be done with just the Core or must you go beyond that? Does the monk do better in some campaigns and not others simply by virtue of the opponents? Does the monk work better against several weaker opponents or can he do fine against one bigger one?
So basically you're saying that swapping feats is somehow too homebrewed? I'm not adding hit dice or otherwise changing the monster's statistics. Just swapping a feat for another core feat the monster qualifies for. Is that too much for the monk to handle? Is it too much for the wizard to handle if a demon has Iron Will instead of Skill Focus (perception)?
I think not. It sounds like excuses to me. No one is going beyond core. If you specifically have to have this monster have a specific selection of feats, or specifically not have a selection of feats, for your character to hope to have anything to do with them, then I expect your character is going to go the way of the dodo. You've already proven to be incapable of flexing, so you will break.
There's a lot of stuff that comes into play in an actual game (lighting, terrain, buffs, motivations, ambushes, etc). If you can't adapt to just a swapped feat, it's made of failure.
You may want to review a feat called "weapon fineese" which, incidentally, my monk is listed as having.Hitting.Given your build, and its low strength, I don't really believe you'd have much luck stunning or grappling, and you definitely wouldn't be laying down the damage like that. I'm just not very impressed.What does strength and stunning fist have to do with each other??
This may be why you think Monks are sub-par.
Why on EARTH would you sink a feat into Weapon Finesse, when you get so much more out of Strength?
|
|
To those claiming monks own because they can survive a monster wailing on them, my question is thus:
If the monk isn't doing much damage, what's stopping the monster fro ignoring them and stomping over to everyone else?
As for the vaunted mobility? Boom. 5,500 GP is how much it costs to replace a monk.
Really?
+10 to movement will bring the medium armored up to...still less than a 3rd level monk.
By the time you can afford to drop 5500 on an item the monks movement is +20 with no armor check penalties has a +1 to natural armor and can spend 2000 of that 55000 on an headband of inspired wisdom, making them an 18, bringing the armor bonus to +5 before you add anything else.
Or I can get my AC up with a belt of physical might for Dex and Strength, raising my AC, damage, and attack bonus...for 500 less than those boots.
You were saying?
No, he didn't. But just because he didn't give me an example didn't give me the right to ignore it ;-)You gave examples?Also, anyone else notice that instead of actually addressing any of my examples or commenting on my offer to run a game for him/her online, he/she instead called me a noob and tried to strawman like a champ?
Also, I'm curious. Exactly what about playing this system (3.x/d20/PF) since its conception 11 years ago would make me such a D&D noob anyway? Is it because my preferred version, and the one I'm most comfortable with, isn't the one that launched over 30 years ago and has virtually no bearing mechanically on the more modern incarnations?
EDIT: The very incarnations that we are discussing, actually.
Actually, I did. My example was that you seem to have relatively little to fall back on, and I think that you're gambling with your chances of actually stunning the creature. Especially since an AoO means you yourself could be stunned for 1d4 rounds and in full-attack range quite easily (which means you'd lose your dodge bonuses to AC, and Dex).
Here's a list of some of my concerns, as I posted them previously.
EDIT: Actually, if you want to find out, you can totally join one of my games on OpenRPG sometime. My online games offer 25 PB and double base HP at 1st level, and I have some house rules that would even let you get your flurry off in the same round you move.
So if you want, you can build your 1st level monk and we'll have a go of it, and we'll see how far you make it.
EDIT 2: Also, I love how the horned devil you fight seems to be forgetting that he has greater teleport at will, fear aura, DR 10/good and silver, magic circle vs good up all the time, and your entire strategy is basically banking on the hopes that he doesn't have the Combat Reflexes feat (instead of say, Improved Vital Strike) which would allow him to completely thrash you when you tried to charge into melee with him in the first place.
EDIT 3: And if you complain about the horned devil possibly having Combat Reflexes then your monk isn't really that good after all. If your whole strategy basically banks on fighting the most generic enemy using the predetermined feats and no other feats it qualifies for, well you've pretty much already lost.
=====
To clarify, I noted that I believed - IN ADDITION - to your lacking on control based techniques that you would also be incapable of dealing decent damage as a fallback. See, no where did I say that damage was what was important, but that you would have difficulties in all those areas.
See a wizard can forgo dealing damage and do something like hit the devil with dimensional anchor to lock down its mobility. Or it could have used magic circle against evil and assisted the entire party, or the wizard could have blinded the creature with a cloud spell, or attempted to turn the turn the critter to stone or something (as long as we're banking on it biffing its fortitude save, why not put a nail in the coffin, right?). Or the wizard could buy some time and try to spirit the party away if the horned devil is beyond them.
Your entire hope of fighting the horned devil basically relied on you getting the drop on the horned devil and then charging in while he was flat-footed and then smacking him with a single low-damage strike which may not even pierce his DR, and then having him biff a saving throw that he has a better than 50% chance to save against, and a miss or failure indicates that you are going to get full-attacked hard on the critter's turn.
Meanwhile, if said critter merely has Combat Reflexes, he gets his AoO against you even while flat-footed and uses his superior reach to attempt to smack you with his chain, or sunder your weapon if you're using a weapon to pierce his DR, or attempt to trip you (which he has a +26 to Trip), or he could just slap you and then you have to make a DC 27 save or be stunned for 1d4 rounds. Holy crap, he stole your trick!
EDIT: Also, if he swapped Vital Strike for Ability Focus, the DC on the stun becomes 29. That way he basically gets a chance to stun on every hit (a big chance too!) and he doesn't even have to use his turn to do it. Nice.
Discuss.
The Monk is attacking from Stealth. What Attack of Opportunity are you talking about???
Focus on things that might actually apply to the situation. IF the monk were fighting something else, he'd use other tactics.
Ok, so you're relying on attacking the creature from Stealth (I'll assume you have some sort of magical concealment allowing you to use Stealth to sneak up on him and whack him, rather than charging or whatever). So you must first beat his Perception, hope he doesn't have Combat Reflexes, land your hit, and then hope he biffs a save that he has a 60% chance to beat right out of the box (not counting buffs, feats, etc), with the hope of stunning him for 1 round?
That's a lot of variables, and a lot of potential for "oh-crap" moments. If any of that fails, the devil can full attack you with his chain. Each hit forces a DC 27 save or stun for 1d4 rounds. That would be bad for you in the extreme. Meanwhile, you are now ground-zero with the monster, and the monster has a greater reach than you do as well. You can't actually fight him effectively because your damage is low and likely to not pierce his DR.
So I'm asking, is this what you're advocating? The monk's job is to gamble on the chance that you'll pierce all your enemy's defenses, all of which you have little control over, and then hope he gets stunned?
I'm asking for you to explain this. From where I'm sitting, that looks inordinately risky and pretty bad. I'm pretty sure this monk would die in my games (as I've noted) because he seems to be having to risk a lot on a gamble to be semi-effective.
Please, discuss.
What do you want from the monk? Obviously those who like it have found a place that it fills in their games. They aren't looking for massive damage, instead they are looking for combat maneuvers. They aren't looking to go toe-to-toe, they are looking to be more versatile. They aren't looking for tons of hit points, they are looking at not being hit in the first place.
Except monks are no better at combat maneuvers then any other class.
The monk, like any other character, will fill the niche that the players want it to fill for their games. You don't think the monk can do that in your games and I'm willing to bet that no one will ever convince you otherwise. That doesn't mean that the monk can't be a playable class though, in someone else's campaign.
Replace "monk" with "commoner," and I see no differences.
Monks fill the same niche as barbarians. They are the ones who can survive anything, making it possible for what should have been a TPK to be salvageable. My monks always have a few curative potions or marvelous ointments on them, because they are the best there is at ignoring being attacked by the enemy long enough to stand the melee and caster characters back up.
Know what makes a TPK even more salvageable?
Winning.
If my choices are "A character that helps us win" and "A character that helps us not lose as badly," which do you think I'm going to take?
Monks have very, very high perception, high initiative, high and varied movement (air walk - via cloud step, dimension door _as_a_move_action_, acrobatics as a class skill, very very high base move (which becomes ridiculous with just 5,500 gp), very high stealth, etc.), substantial combat manuevers, and substantial resistance to all kinds of attacks.
You can't figure out how to take advantage of those ablities?
None of those are unique to monks. High perception, initiative, and stealth? Any class can have that. "Substantial combat manuevers?" Again, any full BAB class has that. Varied movement? "I cast fly." Super high base move? No, I can't figure out how to take advantage of that one, unless the Monk also gets superpowers like the Flash has. And substantial resistance? Not really! Spell Resistance isn't really substantial, the "high defenses" means you have to spike down strength (woops there goes my offense), and plenty of other classes beat it at saves.
Again, your entire list is entirely non-unique to monks.
Someone asked what I want from monks. I want something that is monks-only. Nobody else gets barbarian rages, nobody else gets rogue talents, nobody else gets magus arcana, or cavalier orders, or etc, etc, etc.
Monks have nothing that is monk-unique. What they get is a lot of watered down abilities from other classes. They don't even have a unique fighting style - think about that! The martial artist doesn't have a unique fighting style!
Also the Horned Devil is a silly example because he isn't going to just stand there and wail on you, he's going to teleport away, throw a bunch of summons at you, and then hit you from out of reach.
Also the Horned Devil is a silly example because he isn't going to just stand there and wail on you, he's going to teleport away, throw a bunch of summons at you, and then hit you from out of reach.
I mentioned this earlier as well. No one that I saw, other than myself, commented on the fact it has greater teleport at will, essentially giving it infinite movement for 1 standard action.
Ashiel, I already discussed the monk's stealth vs. the Devil's perception along with a lot of other stuff.
Please, review.
That's kind of irrelevant. I'm asking if this is the case. You've got to have all your ducks in a row, or don't you?
EDIT: To put it another way, is this the best your monk has to offer? Is this the monk's niche? Gambling on hoping a series of checks and saves and situations allows you to stun the badguy for 1 round, assuming of course that you get to ambush the badguy and land in melee combat with him from the get go?
|
|
I mentioned this earlier as well. No one that I saw, other than myself, commented on the fact it has greater teleport at will, essentially giving it infinite movement for 1 standard action.
Yes, CR 16 creatures are tough. He also has Spell Resistance 27, damage reduction and regeneration.
However if the stun is successful (not a spell, so no SR) then it can't teleport away forever. Which was the point.
Not the point I would make about monks, but it was the point.
I couldn't find them. Maybe I missed them. Could you link to the specific post, or perhaps quote them?
How many classes have Wisdom as a prime req and Perception as a class skill?
...Druid, ranger, inquisitor?
How many of those classes have stealth?
Druid doesn't need stealth because it can turn into a rat, ranger has stealth, inquisitor has stealth. So...all.
How many of those classes also get free feats to buy combat manuevers with?
None of them need them. Maneuvers are laughably weak due to the rampant access of Freedom of Movement or teleportation abilities.
"Fly" doesn't trump everything. You want to use fly in cramped quarters (such as exist underground)? Or in an anti-magic zone? Or in a high wind area (or fog or forest)?
And anti-magic-zones appear often in your games? As for forests or fog, are you kidding? That's where flying is best - they fly out of it and away! But ok, I'll give cramped quarters.
How many classes have spell resistance?
Irrelavent, just as SR is.
How many have, in addition to that spell resistance, all high saves -and- immunities on top of that?
SR is irrelevant, as already mentioned. Immunities are irrelevant due to the hilarious ease of healing.
I think there's only one class which can answer those questions. Only one. _Uniquely_ one.
You're proving my point. The monk has a bunch of weak abilities mostly cribbed off other classes that come together to make nothing.
Monk's are known to do better damage than rogue's (DPR olympics); and monk's still have an okay amount of skills from a useful selection. The rogue generally has better access to social skills, but the monk intrudes well on stealth, perception and acrobatic areas.
Some people disagree. Even high level games require skill checks, and rogues put out decent damage
...depending on build. On average a rogue is more useful in a party since it can cover more areas.
Even if you compare an archery based ranger with an archery based monk? The ranger is a very competent archer, for sure, but the zen archer is still a better at archery.
Rangers also have more useful skills, and an animal companion. I think an archery based ranger is better than a monk in combat. Edge:Ranger
I thought we were sticking to core. If not the guide variant should be able to still be better in a party.
I doubt a monk will give a GM a harder time. If the fighter is not built to cover its weaknesses then maybe, but that is a player issue, not a fighter issue. Maybe the barbarian will not challenge a GM much, but the other classes named can be headaches.How does the fighter cover his weaknesses? A cloak (like the one the monk has too)? Iron Will (like the monk has too)? Even if the fighter has hardcore fortitude he still fails between 5% and 20% of the time against disease and poisons. He's prone to fail his saves vs enemy spellcasters that will curse, dominate, confuse or otherwise mess with his head.
A fighter will most likely have a higher fort save than a monk since hp is important due to the fact that he is a frontliner.
A monk being better at will saves does not mean a fighter can not be decent at it. I never said fighter could have monk's will saves. I am saying they can be good enough that the fighter is not going to fail as much as people like to believe it will.
+4 fullplate
+4 heavy shield
18 Dex (+4 dex belt)
dodge feat
shield focus feat
greater shield focus feat
+3 amulet of natural armor
+3 ring of protection
dusty rose prism ioun stoneI only checked this one and the numbers are off.
+4 fullplate=13
+4 shield=9
dex=4
dodge feat=1
sheild feats=2
amulet=3
ring=3
ioun stone=113+9+4+1+2+3+3+1=32+10(base AC)=46
If the fighter uses a defending weapon then that is 3 more for 49
combat expertise is another 5 for 54.edit:I forgot to include the dex bonus
Edit:There is also a feat that lets fighter add his shield bonus to his ACtouch AC-->19 normally, +3 for the weapon, and +5 for combat expertise=27(2 less than the monk's).
edit 3:That was the 16th level fighter.
Oops, but:
Where does a +4 heavy shield grant +9 to AC? I don't remember seeing a Pathfinder feat that lets you add shield to touch AC - but Ray Shield allows you to "Deflect Arrow" one ranged touch attack (at the cost of the shield absorbing the relevant effect of the spell).
The monk too can wield a defending quarterstaff (+3)
The monk too can have combat expertise (+4)
Still better AC on the monkAll this assumes a fighter that gives up his DPR potential to have high defenses. This is, of course, a perfectly valid strategy for a fighter to take - but in that case his DPR is actually lower than the monk's. The monk gives much up less damage potential in the process of being a well-defended character. He still has better saves and utility, still has better AC, and now also has better DPR than the fighter.
Darn it. My math was off. I have no idea what I was thinking with that shield, but that drops it by 3 to a 43, but that is still higher than the 36 which I knew had to be off. Of course neither of those AC's are too high to be hit so the one that can kill the bad guy faster and draw attention is still more useful. If I knew I could not hit the monk's save or his AC then I would save him for last.
The fighter can always bump the DPR up or down as needed. That is flexibility the monk does not have. Advantage:Fighter.The fighter does not have to be the utility guy because the rest of the party handles that. If the monk is taking the utility role as a primary then it is replacing the rogue which already has better utility. Whatever the monk does someone does it decidedly better, which is the primary problem with it.
Once players move beyond the training wheels idea of "roles", monks start shining.Defensive _____ is meaningless as this is a 3e game, and in the 3e engine offensive wins every single time.
I keep seeing people going "Well of course the fighter is better at being a fighter then a monk." I've yet to see a core "niche" for the monk that can't be done better by other classes.
So then enlighten me. What does the monk actively do to help the matter that can't be done better or nearly as good as anyone else?
Go back to my original example.
Who won the fight?
The one who lost the +2 flaming greatsword in two rounds? Or the one who took 14 damage and left with the loot?
If the Monk and the fighter stand up toe to toe, the fighter wins nearly every time. That's what the fighter does.
The Monk wins when he does something the fighter can't do or isn't prepared for. Like run up, disarm, take the fighter's weapon (or take the fighter's weapon and shield if he beats the disarm check by a high enough amount) and then leaves with them.
I agree that iterative attacks are a horrible way to boost damage. I prefer how 4E handles them. I really wish maneuver on the battle map was more important in PF; that is what's needed for the Monk (and the Rogue) more than anything.
Many types of armor comes with gauntlets. The fighter still has a weapon, and he should also still have a backup weapon.
Disarming a shield is debatable. There is a thread on that idea going on now.
SR is a trap option. Your buddy wants to cast a helpful spell on you so you have to spend a standard action to lower it. That pretty much eats up a round for you, and he has to tell you ahead of time so you know to lower it, and that also means the enemy can hear you announce it also.
You could say the group has some special sign language, but that is not something most groups do and depends on GM fiat. If a class needs GM fiat to get by......
I will say the same thing I say in every monk thread. A monk can be effective with the right player, but it is hard to play one and contribute since they don't have anything they excel at that can't be done by another class.
Even Stunning Fist is just a feat.
A fighter can get decent will saves. Most players just aren't willing to go through the trouble to make it happen.
A monk doesn't have to do any work to get decent will saves. Our fighter took Iron Will. He has done what he can to get decent will saves. He cannot match the monk. Not only do they have a base +6 advantage, but they also are wisdom focused a great deal of time.
They can also get decent touch AC. It might mean a dip into stalwart defender, but if the monk can dip into a full BAB class then a fighter can dip also.
I don't care if you dip into Stalwart Defender. I can rip any fighter you make apart much easier than I can a monk with a caster. You can't make a fighter I can't rip apart fairly easily with a caster. Impossible to do by the rules.
As far as your power attack numbers that is not how it works. DPR is a determined using a formula that has to take into account the target AC, and the total attack bonus of the competing classes. You can't just assume every attack will hit because they won't.
8 attacks to 4 attacks. Monk is going to hit with probably at least half of them.
Barbarians don't really get any love either, unless you include the APG. Now that I think about it the Stalwart Defender is an APG thing and I think this conversation is core only so the fighter has to...
You can use the APG or any other Pathfinder produced book. I don't use 3PP books to design your fighter. I don't much care.
As far as Death Ward. Most smart casters have up Arcane Sight and determine what spells they are dealing with first. And some casters don't even bother to wait. They will strip your Death Ward or your Death Ward item with a targeted quickened Dispel Magic and then proceed to unload on you with an Energy Drain.
And as far as no damaging ranged touch attacks. That's hilarious. I can generally mash you with an Elemental (acid or cold)Empowered Contagious Flame followed up with a Quickened Empowered Elemental Scorching Ray from either an acid or cold dragon.
Contagious Flame damage: 24d6+24 for average of 108 points
Scorching Ray damage: 18d6+18 for average of 81 points
189 points of damage in one round to you. Then once I reduce your hit points down. Perhaps I'll quicken another ray attack and then follow it up with a Power Word Kill to finish you off. Better pray you have a Death Ward up.
Now a monk on the other hand with his crazy high touch AC is going to be much harder to hit with all those ray attacks. Even if I use AoE, he has evasion to avoid the damage completely and much better reflex saves.
I don't know who told you ray attacks don't do much damage. Whoever did, they are wrong. You can mash really hard with a caster focused on rays.
Inquisitors are the best class in my opinion. No real weaknesses to exploit. Massive options for offense and defense. Great natural defenses like high Will and Fort. Powerful personal healing with the heal spell and spells like Restoration and Greater Invisibility.
What class has the level of versatility of the Inquisitor? I'm lvl 11 and every time I hit with my Inquisitor, someone makes a death save when I have all my buffs going. None of the other +15 BAB classes can match the Inquisitor in versatility.
...A fighter can get decent will saves. Most players just aren't willing to go through the trouble to make it happen.A monk doesn't have to do any work to get decent will saves. Our fighter took Iron Will. He has done what he can to get decent will saves. He cannot match the monk. Not only do they have a base +6 advantage, but they also are wisdom focused a great deal of time.
They can also get decent touch AC. It might mean a dip into stalwart defender, but if the monk can dip into a full BAB class then a fighter can dip also.I don't care if you dip into Stalwart Defender. I can rip any fighter you make apart much easier than I can a monk with a caster. You can't make a fighter I can't rip apart fairly easily with a caster. Impossible to do by the rules.
As far as your power attack numbers that is not how it works. DPR is a determined using a formula that has to take into account the target AC, and the total attack bonus of the competing classes. You can't just assume every attack will hit because they won't.8 attacks to 4 attacks. Monk is going to hit with probably at least half of them.
Barbarians don't really get any love either, unless you include the APG. Now that I think about it the Stalwart Defender is an APG thing and I think this conversation is core only so the fighter has to...You can use the APG or any other Pathfinder produced book. I don't use 3PP books to design your fighter. I don't much care.
As far as Death Ward. Most smart casters have up Arcane Sight and determine what spells they are dealing with first. And some casters don't even bother to wait. They will strip your Death Ward or your Death Ward item with a targeted quickened Dispel Magic and then proceed to unload on you with an Energy Drain.
And as far as no damaging ranged touch attacks. That's hilarious. I can generally mash you with an Elemental (acid or
The post is messed up due to misplaced bbcode for the "quote" tags.
stuff about touch ac.
The monk only had a 29 touch AC.
The fighter can have a 27 touch AC before using combat expertise, fighting defensively or a defending weapon. If he goes stalwart defender the touch AC is even higher.
From the posts that was built up by Lorekeeper
+4 heavy shield=6
dex=4
dodge feat=1
sheild feats=2
There is a feat that allows shield to add to touch AC.
ring=3
ioun stone=1
If the fighter can be hit on average which I will go over next then the monk can also.
I am assuming we have a 16th level caster.
scorching ray does 4d6 per ray. The average per ray is 14 x 1.5=21
21 x 3 rays=81
I have to look contagious up.
You blast several enemies with beams of fire. You may fire three rays, plus one additional ray for every four levels beyond 11th (to a maximum of five rays at 19th level). Each ray requires a ranged touch attack to hit and deals 4d6 points of fire damage. The rays may be fired at the same or different targets, but all rays must be aimed at targets within 30 feet of each other and fired simultaneously.
At level 16 you get 4 rays for 16d6. If you tried to empower it then it would be an 8th level spell. I am assuming you did since you said 24d6 though.
A level 16 caster has a BAB of 8, and I will say in a real game has a dex mod of +3. That is a +11. It looks like the fighter and the monk are safe to me.
...A fighter can get decent will saves. Most players just aren't willing to go through the trouble to make it happen.A monk doesn't have to do any work to get decent will saves. Our fighter took Iron Will. He has done what he can to get decent will saves. He cannot match the monk. Not only do they have a base +6 advantage, but they also are wisdom focused a great deal of time.
They can also get decent touch AC. It might mean a dip into stalwart defender, but if the monk can dip into a full BAB class then a fighter can dip also.I don't care if you dip into Stalwart Defender. I can rip any fighter you make apart much easier than I can a monk with a caster. You can't make a fighter I can't rip apart fairly easily with a caster. Impossible to do by the rules.
As far as your power attack numbers that is not how it works. DPR is a determined using a formula that has to take into account the target AC, and the total attack bonus of the competing classes. You can't just assume every attack will hit because they won't.8 attacks to 4 attacks. Monk is going to hit with probably at least half of them.
Barbarians don't really get any love either, unless you include the APG. Now that I think about it the Stalwart Defender is an APG thing and I think this conversation is core only so the fighter has to...You can use the APG or any other Pathfinder produced book. I don't use 3PP books to design your fighter. I don't much care.
As far as Death Ward. Most smart casters have up Arcane Sight and determine what spells they are dealing with first. And some casters don't even bother to wait. They will strip your Death Ward or your Death Ward item with a targeted quickened Dispel Magic and then proceed to unload on you with an Energy Drain.
And as far as no damaging ranged touch attacks. That's hilarious. I can generally mash you with an Elemental
Fixed it.
All I know is I am speaking from experience DMing against a lvl 11 and lvl 18 monk.
I find the monk more difficult to deal with than the fighter.
Mainly because the power of special monster abilities and casters is so prevalent at high level.
Some spells that wreck a fighter and are easily evaded as a monk:
1. Conjured Pit Spell line. Fighter is usually sitting at the bottom of a pit doing nothing. Monk either avoids it or takes no damage from Slow Fall.
2. Monk Gets SR: It definitely helps against lower level monsters with Spell-like abilities en masse and even occasionally against mainline casters.
3. Touch AC: A monk's high touch AC prevents the tactics I stated above with rays. I know how to use rays to great effect. Now I am incorporating Thanatopic Spell as a feat. And lvl 18 enemies can do an Empowered Thanatopic Enervate with little problem for 2 to 6 negative levels right through a Death Ward.
And I do often set up spell combinations that include a Quicken Dispel Magic aimed a particular defense followed by a hammer spell like Energy Drain. I use these tactics with my own casters, I use them with enemy casters.
I also split the battlefield with Walls of Force and the like. A monk gets around these obstacles much, much quicker than Heavy Plate Fighter guy, especially with Haste in play. If I make a high wall, the monk runs around it. If I make a low wall, the monk jumps over it. If I make a sealed wall, a monk Abundant Steps past it.
Monks have more options than most of the other melee types. Players that know how the high level game goes know how to take advantage their powers.
So when the Fighter and other classes are getting wrecked by AoE spells, high end will spells, death spells, and the like, the monk is equally powerful defensively against all such attacks and often has options to attack or evade his enemies that other classes do not. Players that enjoy monks take advantage of all those options.
When I see folks complaining about the monk, I'm wondering what the heck they are talking about. I'm running a few. I'm not seeing the monk weakness.
They aren't the same level of damage dealer as a fighter or focused +20 melee class against their specialty. But when it comes to defensive capability, few classes are as good as the monk. It's big old pain for a DM to deal with.
Fighters are so easy as a DM to plan for that I barely spend any time thinking about how to stop the fighter types. Now the monk I have to worry about all the time, especially if he knows how to pick up magic items to shore up his weaknesses:
1. Most casters can't hit the monk easy with touch spells unless they use a quickened True Strike.
2. Casters can't effect them easily because good saves across the board and SR.
3. They usually aren't the character focused on first in battle because their damage output is lower. So they sneak up on most of what they're fighting.
4. You can't destroy them with AoE spells because of Evasion.
5. Their skills are usually very good. So they sneak into battle using Stealth and still move as fast as the melee types double moving. With that monk speed, they stealth at 30 to 45 feet a round in a single move.
6. Perceptions and Sense Motives are usually high, so they are not easily fooled.
There is so much a monk brings to the table in a group that they are rarely if ever the weakest or near the weakest member of the group. In all the groups I've run the monk is usually one of the most dangerous party members and a class the DM has to watch out for.
I still remember when I was playing my dwarf grappling monk. I was messing up the DMs encounters with grappling. I was a physical crowd control device.
I have no experience with the monk being weak. The monk class is one of the more troublesome classes in the game speaking as DM that often sees campaigns go to lvl 15 plus.
Rather than compare monks to home ruled campaigns, how do they compare to the Bestiary and NPCs they need to fight? If we change the feats, gear, spell-like abilities, etc of the opponents, then obviously things will be very different for all classes. What are the benchmarks we need to focus on if we use just what's written? Can the monk deal with that? Can it be done with just the Core or must you go beyond that? Does the monk do better in some campaigns and not others simply by virtue of the opponents? Does the monk work better against several weaker opponents or can he do fine against one bigger one?So basically you're saying that swapping feats is somehow too homebrewed? I'm not adding hit dice or otherwise changing the monster's statistics. Just swapping a feat for another core feat the monster qualifies for. Is that too much for the monk to handle? Is it too much for the wizard to handle if a demon has Iron Will instead of Skill Focus (perception)?
I think not. It sounds like excuses to me. No one is going beyond core. If you specifically have to have this monster have a specific selection of feats, or specifically not have a selection of feats, for your character to hope to have anything to do with them, then I expect your character is going to go the way of the dodo. You've already proven to be incapable of flexing, so you will break.
There's a lot of stuff that comes into play in an actual game (lighting, terrain, buffs, motivations, ambushes, etc). If you can't adapt to just a swapped feat, it's made of failure.
What I'm saying is that if you change a creature then it is not the same as it was originally intended. That can have a tremendous impact since not all feats are created equal. That's no secret. If I take the basilisk, remove Skill Focus (perception) and give it Power Attack, drop Blind Fight and give it Weapon Focus (bite), I have potentially made the creature more potent in combat. This is especially true if the party isn't stealthy or has ways of being concealed. Some feat changes will make a significant difference. In this case, it will hit more often for more damage. Swap out Great Fortitude and Iron Will for Improved Natural Armor twice and it's also harder to hit. If there are no casters in the party (and that is entirely possible), this basilisk will be a different threat to the 3/4 BAB classes.
Take the grizzly bear and change its feats to Iron Will, Improved Iron Will, and Power Attack and this bear with the changed feats can become a real threat to a caster who was relying on that +2 Will Save.
If you are changing the creature from what is written, then you are house ruling. That's fine with me but remember that it is a house rule and so you are no longer comparing the monk with RAW. That's what I'm talking about. Also, by changing the feats you could be potentially making Knowledge checks less useful since there isn't much consistency.
What do you want from the monk? Obviously those who like it have found a place that it fills in their games. They aren't looking for massive damage, instead they are looking for combat maneuvers. They aren't looking to go toe-to-toe, they are looking to be more versatile. They aren't looking for tons of hit points, they are looking at not being hit in the first place.Except monks are no better at combat maneuvers then any other class.
They actually might be since they don't have to qualify for the feats so some of the MAD is dealt with. Besides, they don't have to be better. I think this is where you and I see things differently: you approach each class as a binary issue. Either the class is the best or it's not worth looking at. I don't see it that way. Your view isn't wrong, but it also isn't automatically right either. It's just right for you.
Replace "monk" with "commoner," and I see no differences.
There's nothing I can tell you then. If you don't see any differences then there will never be anything I can do to convince you otherwise. Your mind has been made up and this is no longer a conversation where information is exchanged and the potential for changing opinions exists.
Keep in mind that I am not telling you that you are wrong in thinking monks are not good, in your campaigns. I am saying that it is wrong to assume that they are universally bad in all campaigns even when only RAW is used.
1. Conjured Pit Spell line. Fighter is usually sitting at the bottom of a pit doing nothing. Monk either avoids it or takes no damage from Slow Fall.
I contribute that to bad fighter design. It is normally the same fighter design that has poor will saves instead of at least decent ones. No class should "normally" fail a particular save unless the dice gods intervene.
2. Monk Gets SR: It definitely helps against lower level monsters with Spell-like abilities en masse and even occasionally against mainline casters.
Lower level monster have DC's low enough that the party should make the saves most of the time. This falls in line with point 1. Against same level NPC casters the save should be made by the monk, but the SR should still be passed, and it still does not solve the issue of a monk needing a beneficial spell from the party's caster and the spell failing to bypass SR at the wrong time. The dice gods are evil like that.
3. Touch AC: A monk's high touch AC prevents the tactics I stated above with rays. I know how to use rays to great effect. Now I am incorporating Thanatopic Spell as a feat. And lvl 18 enemies can do an Empowered Thanatopic Enervate with little problem for 2 to 6 negative levels right through a Death Ward.
The touch AC can be had as a fighter as I showed above. The 18th level fighter should not be getting hit by the anything that won't hit the monk. As for SR an 18th level monk has SR of 28 assuming he goes straight monk. It seem reasonable for a caster to have spell penetration. meaning he has a better than 50% chance to affect the monk. He actually has a better chance of bypassing SR than he does of hitting the monk. If a caster drops negative levels on my fighter he dies. Flying and being invis is not a good defense. Mirror image would be an issue, but the casters that are in the party can take care of that with dispel magic. So far the monk is still falling to anything that takes care of fighters.
And I do often set up spell combinations that include a Quicken Dispel Magic aimed a particular defense followed by a hammer spell like Energy Drain. I use these tactics with my own casters, I use them with enemy casters.
I do also, but the monk is not in a position to not be affected anymore than anyone else is.
I also split the battlefield with Walls of Force and the like. A monk gets around these obstacles much, much quicker than Heavy Plate Fighter guy, especially with Haste in play. If I make a high wall, the monk runs around it. If I make a low wall, the monk jumps over it. If I make a sealed wall, a monk Abundant Steps past it.
Walls of Force is a non issue by 18th level. If I use it then it is an enclosed area so the wall goes from the floor to the ceiling. I drop it at my convenience. After a monk uses Abundant Step he can't take any other actions. Being trapped with the enemy is not a good place to be if I am the GM. Focus fire and kill the silly prisoner is what happens next.
They aren't the same level of damage dealer as a fighter or focused +20 melee class against their specialty. But when it comes to defensive capability, few classes are as good as the monk. It's big old pain for a DM to deal with.
I am still not seeing it.
Fighters are so easy as a DM to plan for that I barely spend any time thinking about how to stop the fighter types. Now the monk I have to worry about all the time, especially if he knows how to pick up magic items to shore up his weaknesses:
Fighters and monks are ignored easily by me also at high levels.
1. Most casters can't hit the monk easy with touch spells unless they use a quickened True Strike.
2. Casters can't effect them easily because good saves across the board and SR.
Taken care of already
3. They usually aren't the character focused on first in battle because their damage output is lower. So they sneak up on most of what they're fighting.
They are ignored because they don't do much, and the sneaking does not happen in the middle of combat in my games, but that might be a playstyle issue.
4. You can't destroy them with AoE spells because of Evasion.
You can't destroy anyone else either unless you build a focused blaster, and in that case the monk still feels some pain.
5. Their skills are usually very good. So they sneak into battle using Stealth and still move as fast as the melee types double moving. With that monk speed, they stealth at 30 to 45 feet a round in a single move.
Playstyle
6. Perceptions and Sense Motives are usually high, so they are not easily fooled.
I will give you that, but that applies to other classes also. I don't see a monk fitting into a 4 man party and making the party better by replacing any other class.
There is so much a monk brings to the table in a group that they are rarely if ever the weakest or near the weakest member of the group. In all the groups I've run the monk is usually one of the most dangerous party members and a class the DM has to watch out for.
I still remember when I was playing my dwarf grappling monk. I was messing up the DMs encounters with grappling. I was a physical crowd control device.
Playstyle. Monster's usually have a high CMD at high levels unless a GM uses humanoid monsters.
I have no experience with the monk being weak. The monk class is one of the more troublesome classes in the game speaking as DM that often sees campaigns go to lvl 15 plus.
In my games it falls off even more at higher levels. I don't see a monk giving me any trouble barring bad rolls on my part or really good rolls on their part, and in that case the rolls should get the credit.
Rather than compare monks to home ruled campaigns, how do they compare to the Bestiary and NPCs they need to fight? If we change the feats, gear, spell-like abilities, etc of the opponents, then obviously things will be very different for all classes....Good points, but if I run a monk in an AP with 15 pb which is standard I don't see it doing well. It seems to need 20 pb at a minimum.
I will also add that her point was probably that the other classes are still keeping up. If the monk can't keep up....?