| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
A SERIOUS ARGUMENT FOR THE MONK
Introduction
It has been said by many that monks are underpowered in Pathfinder for various reasons, including a less-than-full base attack bonus, a less-than-maximum damage output, and a multiple-ability-dependency. While I do not seek to disprove any of these points, I would argue that once you leave the world of theorycrafting and enter actual gameplay, monks begin to shine and their role becomes quite clear. We will go through several points one at a time, responding to the potential pitfalls as we proceed.
A Mobile Warrior
While one should look elsewhere for gaining the maximum in certain combat statistics, the monk becomes the star when movement is required. When well designed and played, a monk is unmatched by any in terms of mobility on the battlefield. With no need for armor, the monk avoids both speed loss and the armor check penalty that would otherwise apply to Acrobatics and the like.
In addition, the monk gains speed increases with level, quickly becoming the fastest creature on the field. With the addition of ki points to increase speed, even a mid-level monk can outrun almost anything in the game.
Now, movement on the battlefield is vital for several reasons. Firstly, controlling the battle is all about positioning. Where you are in relation to the enemy, how you predict their movements, set up tactical advantages, and innumerable other factors all rely on speed. Second, getting to the fight in time is almost as important for a warrior as being effective when he or she arrives. While the slower and armor-wearing warriors are stumping along, struggling to get in front of the softer caster targets, the monk may arrive suddenly and unexpected, like lightning out of a clear sky. Third, countering slowing effects and sticky situations can often be impossible without a great speed. In an encounter with difficult terrain, with enemies casting darkness and entangle effects, slower warriors can be mired for hours and worn down to death. The monk can run or leap out of these areas and bring the offense to the enemy instead of lying down in despair.
As soon as you stop having all your encounters in a small stone hallway and enter the world of adventure on real and complex terrain, a mobile warrior becomes a key component of any group.
The Power of Flurry
Monks have a powerful ability called Flurry of Blows, which allows them to make a dangerous full attack with a bonus as if they had a full base attack bonus. They gain this ability at first level, and it scales as they increase in power. This ability alone makes a Monk dangerous and effective in combat. It is true that their numbers fall slightly below a fighter or similar who takes all the two-weapon fighting feats that monks are assumed to have in Flurry. However, this doesn’t matter. Such a fighter would lack all the abilities and options that a monk possesses, while specializing heavily in one aspect of combat. A monk can be a master of the same thing without being the best, most damaging example that could possibly exist. They can have less than the best possible average damage in return for a deluge of powerful abilities in other areas.
One of the most common complaints regarding the monk has to do with their three-fourths base attack bonus. It is true that monks are a melee warrior class, and that they need to hit their targets just like everyone else. However, I would argue that the three-fourths base attack bonus is the only thing keeping monks back from sweeping all competition out of the water. Imagine a monk that could speed in and out of the battle every turn, hitting with the maximum bonus available in the game, and zipping away at will. It is appropriate to have a monk required to stand still and use a Flurry of Blows to get such a powerful attack in. Keep in mind that a monk is not a fighter without armor. A monk fulfills a powerful and unique role.
The Master of Defense
While they don’t always have the absolute highest number that one could possibly build for in a defense, monks are the hardest to kill of any base class. James Jacobs once stated that the monk is a defensive class, and he was correct; however, his phrasing has been misinterpreted by many.
A defensive class doesn’t mean that you only play responsively to the enemy, struggling to catch up in damage while reducing the amount taken. Nor does playing a “tank” literally mean wearing metal and advancing slowly and ponderously over the field while carrying the heaviest weapons. It means having the best defense available in all areas, and taking the enemy’s blows when others can’t.
The monk has the most well-rounded defense in the game. They are the one and only class with all good saves. I am tempted to put that in all caps: ALL GOOD SAVES. They can be built with a very high armor class (if not the highest possible in the game), and can pump that higher with a ki point. Nobody else can say that they don’t have an Achilles heel in any area. No matter what attack the game throws at a monk, whether it be axe-wielding cyclopes or fireball-hurling demons, the monk has a strong defense. This well-rounded defense makes the monk arguably the best tank in the game; where the fighters and paladins stumble in the face of a lightning bolt, the monk leaps away and has evasion to escape the entirety of the damage. A monk can direct attention to him/herself and then escape the consequences no matter what kind they might be.
Adaptability and Threat
While the monk may not be the most adaptable nor necessarily the most dangerous in the party, the class is very well designed to do both of these. With ki points, the monk can gain an incredible boost to AC, speed, or an additional attack in the round. As three things the Monk is already good at, the ability to become truly great at one of them in a round is crucial. Whether attack or defense is paramount at that moment, the monk can shine if necessary.
Finally, the monk does indeed pose an enormous threat to the enemy right at level one. This threat comes via Stunning Fist. With the ability to simply slip a stun into a flurry of attacks, the monk has the potential to deal damage and inflict one of the worst effects in the game, all in one turn. Here the monk synergizes extremely well with other warriors in the party, allowing them to move into position without provoking an AoO, set up a flank, and attack a flat-footed enemy with impunity. Avoiding a situation where the monk gets off a Flurry of Blows plus a ki point bonus attack plus a Stunning Fist plus a number of other effects from bonus feats could be absolutely critical in a fight. However, with the monk’s speed and array of movement abilities, avoiding that deadly situation may be impossible.
Conclusion
In the end, we find that monks have a number of places they excel, and an impressive array of unique abilities or combinations that few can match. The monk has a place in almost any party, and can shine almost no matter what kind of encounter they face. Playing a monk can be an enjoyable, fun, and even optimized experience for them and their thankful party members.
Enjoy,
-Moox
P.S. Monks: Why they so frickin’ rad?
P.P.S: I'll be posting this on gamingmage.com tomorrow, if you're interested.
+1 buddy you hit them from the left i will take the right!
|
monks are great if you want to be slightly above average at a lot of various tricks. Most classes can specialize in a lot of the tricks and pull them off better while sacrificing something (usually stunning fist and unarmored ac)
a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
but i still play a lot of monks. its about player creativity and a DM going along with your concept. but "pure RAW" monks are at the low end of the power spectrum
I would personally either play a Monk completely skewed towards Stunning Fist, or completely away from it. The former would have an 18 or 20 (Dwarf) at level one and the latter would never have more than a 14, or maybe even 12; sticking everything into Dex.
I would never try to be a Strength Monk. Why take the Fighters place?
monks are great if you want to be slightly above average at a lot of various tricks. Most classes can specialize in a lot of the tricks and pull them off better while sacrificing something (usually stunning fist and unarmored ac)
a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
but i still play a lot of monks. its about player creativity and a DM going along with your concept. but "pure RAW" monks are at the low end of the power spectrum
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the encounter takes place outdoors against an enemy casting entangle from a large distance, your fighter will be doing zero damage. And are 1st-level druids all that rare?
The monk will get there in one piece and do a lot more than zero damage (dice lords permitting).-Moox
monks are great if you want to be slightly above average at a lot of various tricks. Most classes can specialize in a lot of the tricks and pull them off better while sacrificing something (usually stunning fist and unarmored ac)
a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
but i still play a lot of monks. its about player creativity and a DM going along with your concept. but "pure RAW" monks are at the low end of the power spectrum
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the encounter takes place outdoors against an enemy casting entangle from a large distance, your fighter will be doing zero damage. And are 1st-level druids all that rare?
The monk will get there in one piece and do a lot more than zero damage (dice lords permitting).-Moox
Entangle isn't an instawin spell....
Entangled creatures can attempt to break free as a move action, making a Strength or Escape Artist check. The DC for this check is equal to the DC of the spell.
A Fighter can make a Strength check DC 15 from that Druid.
Bestiary 2 produced the ideal race for strength monks.
|
The only problem with this thought process is when you include people who scour the rules to get the best possible AC, Damage output, etc.....
the monk would be a great addition to any party until you put him in a party with Min/maxers coupled with DMs who adjust encounters for the Min/Maxers. Unfortunately in my experience any melee oriented character MUST have the best possible Attack bonus or he is not able to really be decent in melee. Any guy trying to do damage better be maxed out or his damage is gonna be minor compared to the 10th level dude cranking out a billion damage who has made the DM adjust the Baddies to have Max HP or more.
I like the monk but if I ever tried to play on in one of my games it would be a joke....a long, agonizing, exercise in futilely trying to get him to be able to make a worthwhile contribution.
This is not a rant against Monks, but against playstyles that don't allow Monks to be viable in most games.
thanks to bestiary 2, i can make a creepy bishonen monk with limestone colored skin, jade colored hair and amethyst colored eyes who hits like a freaking truck with his fists.
Bestiary 2 produced the ideal race for strength monks.
Which race is that?
+1 - great post Moox.
Several times in modules/adventure paths it is an encounter with an enemy monk that throws the party in disarray and threatens a TPK.
I'm going to need to see an example build to support this claim before I believe it. Let's say 10th level.
+1 - I see this a lot on the forums, a lot of shouting and no numbers to back it up. I've always been willing to make demonstrative builds to back-up my claims, and I expect the same from others.
|
+1 to the OP. :)
Well, maybe people will be able to help me in this thread. So much monk love will prove useful !
I'm desperate to find two more feats for my character. Vital Strike seems a bit of a no-brainer, and at the same time a waste of space for a monk, especially in this kind of build. I can't take most of feats due to low Dex and low Int.
Qing-gong drunken master from the sacred mountain's lotus, level 11
17 -> 19
8
16 -> 18
8
16 -> 20
12
Saves :
Fort: 7+4+1: 12
Ref: 7-1+1: 7
Will: 7+5+1: 13
HPs :
11d8 + 8(HP1) + 11(PC) + 44(Con) + 11(Tough) = 11d8 + 74.
AC :
10 + 9(Wisdom+bonus) + 4(Armor) + 1(Natural) = 24/19/24
DR 1/-
Attack :
BAB : +8/+3 ; +9/+9/+4/+4/-1
Melee -> +12/+7 ; +13/+13/+8/+8/+3
Dis -> +7/+2
CMB -> +15/+10 (+17 for grapple/disarm/trip)
CMD -> 33 (35 against grapple/disarm/trip)
Damage :
Unarmed -> +16/+11 (2d8+1d6+7, 20x2) (2d8+3d6+7)
FoB -> +17/+17/+12/+12/+7, +17/+17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (2d8+1d6+7, 20x2)
Feats :
H. Endurance
M. Improved Unarmed strike
ML. Touch of serenity
1. Drunken Brawler
1B. Deflect Arrows
2MS. Toughness
2B. Improved Grapple
3. Weapon Focus : Unarmed strike
5. Fast Drinker
6B. Improved disarm
7. Deny Death
9. ???
10B. ???
11. Deep Drinker
Powers :
1. Touch of serenity (11/jour, aucun dégât, Volonté DD20 : ne peut pas attaquer ou incanter pendant 2 rounds.)
4. Barkskin (1) (+4 AC)
5. True Strike (1)
7. Spring Attack (1)
11. Spit venom (2)
Ki Pool :
10 Points.
5 drunken points max, can drink 9 times before suffering of alcohol, moderate addiction.
At first I thought about Ki Throw, but it needs to invest a bit into trip and bull rush to be useful, it doesn't look like my character and the 13th level feat will be Quicken spell-like ability. A shame that Improved Dirty Trick or "Extra Ki Power" can't be taken by RAW, vomiting Hydraulic Torrents and belch Dragon's breaths on vile scoundrels would make my day. :/ (I am a nice person in reality. ;3)
What would you suggest, considering this is for a fat, old hobo fighting like a drunken, badass Hotei/Buddha and spitting venom on ennemies from alcohol he ingests ? One of the major strategies will be to use Spring attack and true trike to disarm an ennemy, and Barkskin for easy AC improvement at the beginning of a fight. Changing of feats can also be suggested.
Thoughts, friends ?
monks are great if you want to be slightly above average at a lot of various tricks. Most classes can specialize in a lot of the tricks and pull them off better while sacrificing something (usually stunning fist and unarmored ac)
a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
but i still play a lot of monks. its about player creativity and a DM going along with your concept. but "pure RAW" monks are at the low end of the power spectrum
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the encounter takes place outdoors against an enemy casting entangle from a large distance, your fighter will be doing zero damage. And are 1st-level druids all that rare?
The monk will get there in one piece and do a lot more than zero damage (dice lords permitting).-Moox
Entangle isn't an instawin spell....
Entangled creatures can attempt to break free as a move action, making a Strength or Escape Artist check. The DC for this check is equal to the DC of the spell.
A Fighter can make a Strength check DC 15 from that Druid.
I was simply referring to the fact that the fighter will have a VERY hard time getting into melee combat range. Indeed, he/she may never reach the Druid.
-Moox
I was simply referring to the fact that the fighter will have a VERY hard time getting into melee combat range. Indeed, he/she may never reach the Druid.-Moox
Let's assume he makes the check. It's difficult terrain, so 1 square counts as two.
Speed 30ft, double move 60.So he can move 6 squares while in the area. Chances are if he's not in the exact center of the spell, he gets out on his turn.
If he fails his first save, he's out in 2 turns.
|
|
I'm going to need to see an example build to support this claim before I believe it. Let's say 10th level.a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
It's going to be hard to make a 10th level fighter with Boots of Teleportation, seeing as it's far more than half a 10th level PC's WBL.
|
|
monks are great if you want to be slightly above average at a lot of various tricks. Most classes can specialize in a lot of the tricks and pull them off better while sacrificing something (usually stunning fist and unarmored ac)
a fighter specialized in unarmed fighting with boots of teleportation can dish out more damage than a monk, and beat them at most of what they do. while wearing full plate or a breastplate
but i still play a lot of monks. its about player creativity and a DM going along with your concept. but "pure RAW" monks are at the low end of the power spectrum
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the encounter takes place outdoors against an enemy casting entangle from a large distance, your fighter will be doing zero damage. And are 1st-level druids all that rare?
The monk will get there in one piece and do a lot more than zero damage (dice lords permitting).-Moox
Entangle isn't an instawin spell....
Entangled creatures can attempt to break free as a move action, making a Strength or Escape Artist check. The DC for this check is equal to the DC of the spell.
A Fighter can make a Strength check DC 15 from that Druid.
I was simply referring to the fact that the fighter will have a VERY hard time getting into melee combat range. Indeed, he/she may never reach the Druid.
-Moox
If a fighter can't get to a druid, he'll pull out his mighty composite longbow, and full attack the tree-hugger to pieces.
Bestiary 2 produced the ideal race for strength monks.
Of course the flipside to that is, bestiary races have been allowed as PCs in 0% of the Pathfinder games I've played in.
That attitude can't be that rare among GMs, can it?
The only problem with this thought process is when you include people who scour the rules to get the best possible AC, Damage output, etc.....
I'm a rules-enthusiast who likes to play optimized characters and I like monks just fine. :)
The way I usually build a monk is around having a very high initiative and maxing out my CMB for grappling and tripping.
You don't have to be a monk to have a 10+ initiative bonus with which to act first, charge across the room, tumble past any AoOs, and grapple a flat-footed spell-caster before they've cast a single spell - but it is a niche that the monk can inhabit very easily, from level 1 on - and one they just keep getting better at until about level 12 when all melee classes start to enter obsolescence.
Bestiary 2 produced the ideal race for strength monks.Which race is that?
The only problem with this thought process is when you include people who scour the rules to get the best possible AC, Damage output, etc.....
the monk would be a great addition to any party until you put him in a party with Min/maxers coupled with DMs who adjust encounters for the Min/Maxers. Unfortunately in my experience any melee oriented character MUST have the best possible Attack bonus or he is not able to really be decent in melee. Any guy trying to do damage better be maxed out or his damage is gonna be minor compared to the 10th level dude cranking out a billion damage who has made the DM adjust the Baddies to have Max HP or more.
I like the monk but if I ever tried to play on in one of my games it would be a joke....a long, agonizing, exercise in futilely trying to get him to be able to make a worthwhile contribution.
This is not a rant against Monks, but against playstyles that don't allow Monks to be viable in most games.
I think that stems more from a difficulty you appear to have in finding ways to make the monk overpowered. I believe it can be done, much like your 10th level dude who has forced the DM to give enemies max HP. That is also a sign of a DM who has failed in his or her duty to interpret rules carefully and make choices about what to allow and from which books.
You make an excellent point about playstyles, but I think it's a false comparison when it sounds to me like your hypothetical people are playing "Can we Break the Game?"When it comes to RPG's as complex as Pathfinder, the answer is always yes.
-Moox
+1 my good sir. You should write for Paizo. ;)
I will, if they'll have me. :)
-Moox
If a fighter can't get to a druid, he'll pull out his mighty composite longbow, and full attack the tree-hugger to pieces.
Indeed. Then this person is playing a good fighter. The fighter will, however, be doing less damage than the monk, having chosen feats geared toward melee combat.
Also, what if the druid stands behind a tree? Or he's a druid/monk with Deflect Arrows?The point is not to prove the fighter can't be effective, but that in the infinite variety of possible encounters, sometimes the monk will be more effective.
-Moox
I'm a rules-enthusiast who likes to play optimized characters and I like monks just fine. :)
The way I usually build a monk is around having a very high initiative and maxing out my CMB for grappling and tripping.
You don't have to be a monk to have a 10+ initiative bonus with which to act first, charge across the room, tumble past any AoOs, and grapple a flat-footed spell-caster before they've cast a single spell - but it is a niche that the monk can inhabit very easily, from level 1 on - and one they just keep getting better at until about level 12 when all melee classes start to enter obsolescence.
An excellent phrasing. I applaud your effective use of the monk.
-Moox
I was simply referring to the fact that the fighter will have a VERY hard time getting into melee combat range. Indeed, he/she may never reach the Druid.-Moox
Let's assume he makes the check. It's difficult terrain, so 1 square counts as two.
Speed 30ft, double move 60.
So he can move 6 squares while in the area. Chances are if he's not in the exact center of the spell, he gets out on his turn.If he fails his first save, he's out in 2 turns.
The Fighter's speed is 20 feet due to heavy armor. It would be approximately 4 or 5 turns before the fighter could reach our imaginary 1st-level druid. All from casting one spell. Multiple entangles means the fighter never reaches the druid, in this hypothetical scenario.
I truly liked your point above about skewing, although I don't believe that having a high STR score means you're competing with the fighter.
-Moox
I know one of the things that a monk is able to do is get to target quickly, but that just seems really risky ya know?
I mean, it's cool if you get to the wizard in time, but I don't want our intrepid monk to suddenly get ganged banged by mooks.
That just seems bad for his health.
I know one of the things that a monk is able to do is get to target quickly, but that just seems really risky ya know?
I mean, it's cool if you get to the wizard in time, but I don't want our intrepid monk to suddenly get ganged banged by mooks.
That just seems bad for his health.
No matter the role, one should play carefully. Perhaps there's an angle where he won't be assaulted by mooks? Possibly he can bull rush this wizard into a more advantageous (for the monk) position? Or perhaps this would be an appropriate time to bust a Ki point for +4 AC.
-Moox
If a fighter can't get to a druid, he'll pull out his mighty composite longbow, and full attack the tree-hugger to pieces.
Indeed. Then this person is playing a good fighter. The fighter will, however, be doing less damage than the monk, having chosen feats geared toward melee combat.
Also, what if the druid stands behind a tree? Or he's a druid/monk with Deflect Arrows?
The point is not to prove the fighter can't be effective, but that in the infinite variety of possible encounters, sometimes the monk will be more effective.-Moox
I hardly think this debate helps either side. The druid turns into a bird and flies over the head of both the monk and fighter. You can both keep bouncing back and forth changing the specifics of the situation, it's still not constructive.
I hardly think this debate helps either side. The druid turns into a bird and flies over the head of both the monk and fighter. You can both keep bouncing back and forth changing the specifics of the situation, it's still not constructive.
If a fighter can't get to a druid, he'll pull out his mighty composite longbow, and full attack the tree-hugger to pieces.
Indeed. Then this person is playing a good fighter. The fighter will, however, be doing less damage than the monk, having chosen feats geared toward melee combat.
Also, what if the druid stands behind a tree? Or he's a druid/monk with Deflect Arrows?
The point is not to prove the fighter can't be effective, but that in the infinite variety of possible encounters, sometimes the monk will be more effective.-Moox
Perhaps. Allow me to repeat: "The point is not to prove the fighter can't be effective, but that in the infinite variety of possible encounters, sometimes the monk will be more effective."
-Moox
The monk is a viable class. In the end he is the middle road, a point somewhere between the combat abilities of the fighter, the versatility of the rogue, and the resistances of the Paladin. He is a Jack of All Trades. If that appeals to your play style then by all means play one.
I think a large part of the issue people have with monks are that they are the class that munchkins gravitate towards. And before anyone starts yelling, I'm NOT calling anyone here a munchkin. I'm simply saying that a lot of people love the idea, consciously or subconsciously, of being better than the rest of their party, and the monk with it's various special abilities appeals to them. The problem arises when it's revealed that they are not the uber-class, and so they take every opportunity to brag about what they can do, thus infuriating their fellow players and breeding hatred towards the class. Just an observation.
It should be repeated that I'm not name calling here. I'm certain that all of the monk lovers here are good gamers who love the class for it's flavor.
Man, it's not even my birthday. What's with all the monk threads?
Domino effect...
And a very merry unbirthday to you!
the monk is standing next to his party's wizard discussing the irresistable force paradox.
That's irresponsible of the Wizard. He should've known better than go adventuring w/o finishing his homework.
At least the monk would've had enough wisdom to do that.
|
|
So what are we arguing now? That a 1st level druid can inconvenience a 1st level fighter? That a monk and a fighter both have ways to contribute to a party? That a 1st level druid casting Entangle just to inconvenience a fighter has used up 1 out of his probably 2 first level spells and will probably not be able to finish the fight?
Man, it's not even my birthday. What's with all the monk threads?Domino effect...
YOU'RE WELCOME!!!!
When I'm not DMing I generally play rogues with a mobility/HTH focus and
I love having a monk in the party..."Hey Kato, what say we move across this battlefield without provoking
any AoO and flank some deserving enemy" ^5regarding entangling the fighter,
1. 30' move? (fighter in light armor?)
2. breaking free is a move action in itself
3. if you don't get out you have to make another reflex save
4. a fighter whose str=druid wis has a 50/50 chance of making the
check...hardly something I would assumeI think its gonna be at LEAST 2 rds unless he's at the edge.
Go Monks
Just curious how all of that dosen't apply to a low level monk as well? I mean if I am missing something let me know.
A SERIOUS ARGUMENT FOR THE MONK
Introduction
It has been said by many that monks are underpowered in Pathfinder for various reasons, including a less-than-full base attack bonus, a less-than-maximum damage output, and a multiple-ability-dependency. While I do not seek to disprove any of these points, I would argue that once you leave the world of theorycrafting and enter actual gameplay, monks begin to shine and their role becomes quite clear. We will go through several points one at a time, responding to the potential pitfalls as we proceed.
A Mobile Warrior
While one should look elsewhere for gaining the maximum in certain combat statistics, the monk becomes the star when movement is required. When well designed and played, a monk is unmatched by any in terms of mobility on the battlefield. With no need for armor, the monk avoids both speed loss and the armor check penalty that would otherwise apply to Acrobatics and the like.
In addition, the monk gains speed increases with level, quickly becoming the fastest creature on the field. With the addition of ki points to increase speed, even a mid-level monk can outrun almost anything in the game.
Now, movement on the battlefield is vital for several reasons. Firstly, controlling the battle is all about positioning. Where you are in relation to the enemy, how you predict their movements, set up tactical advantages, and innumerable other factors all rely on speed. Second, getting to the fight in time is almost as important for a warrior as being effective when he or she arrives. While the slower and armor-wearing warriors are stumping along, struggling to get in front of the softer caster targets, the monk may arrive suddenly and unexpected, like lightning out of a clear sky. Third, countering slowing effects and sticky situations can often be impossible without a great speed. In an encounter with difficult terrain, with enemies casting darkness and entangle effects, slower warriors can be mired for hours and worn down to death. The monk can run or...
You have not said anything that has not been already said and countered.
i have seen monks function very well in combat. and not just with straight forward DPR. i remember my friend Harvey from Weekly William's group doing some very out of the box things with a monk (he did some with cleric too). sometimes a whole new house rule was implemented on the spot to accomodate the solution. most of the time, these solutions are very simple if you think about it. and most individuals bound by complexity wouldn't dare to think of these simple solutions that are right under thier noses.
some of the solutions would appear to scream Mcguyver, but most of them are as simple as casting shatter to damage oversized hard shelled crustacians or using a 'firehose' (Decanter of endless water) to blind a foe and set up sneak attacks from the tagalong child. he has Mcguyvered various devices from improvised common sources.
he just doesn't let his mind get overrun by unneccessary complexity. he is also a very straightforward guy. very to the point, he shaves off any complexity he deems unneccessary. and he is not a machine bound to the rules like most of the group happens to be.
our loss of Harvey from the group because of his still ongoing fight against cancer is major loss to the group, both an excellent friend and an excellent player. he still fights it to this day, but he is a great hero to look up to. and he has helped many. he provides low income housing for clients on rehabilitation, is the SSI Payee for several clients, a generous landlord and a kind soul. unlike most of the group, he didn't attempt to provide a maximized set of numbers, he provided a series of innovative solutions that were far better than any numerical bonus on the dice. solutions that are dying with the new generation of players.
Just curious how all of that dosen't apply to a low level monk as well? I mean if I am missing something let me know.When I'm not DMing I generally play rogues with a mobility/HTH focus and
I love having a monk in the party..."Hey Kato, what say we move across this battlefield without provoking
any AoO and flank some deserving enemy" ^5regarding entangling the fighter,
1. 30' move? (fighter in light armor?)
2. breaking free is a move action in itself
3. if you don't get out you have to make another reflex save
4. a fighter whose str=druid wis has a 50/50 chance of making the
check...hardly something I would assumeI think its gonna be at LEAST 2 rds unless he's at the edge.
Go Monks
All I'm going to say in this thread is that he has a point, at level one a monk still only has a 30ft movement. A barbarian already has 40, ill take the crazy barbarian over the monk at this level every time.
Edit: @nekogami: He appears to just be using the dirty trick maneuver, is his CMB high?
I "love" how he put "Mobile Warrior" directly above "Flurry of Blows".
Sorry, the Monk is sub-par to the other classes in most aspects. It's the only real MAD class left in the game and with an assumption of a 15 point buy, that alone leaves it in a terrible space, either as the herpderpderp town idiot with other exceptional stats or as the guy in the party who doesn't excel anywhere.
I could go on, but what for? We've seen this discussion hundreds of times by now. I hope Ultimate Combat finally finds a solution to elevate the Monk towards the level of the other classes.
A fact that keeps getting overlooked is that Wis and Dex, both impact just about everything for a Monk (and this becomes even more true with agile manuevers and both weapon finesse, and power attack).
That means that while other characters are buying more powerful magic weapons, armor, etc., the monk can go much further by just buying stat boosters.
In another thread I'm building a 28pt buy polearm fighter...i think this comment along with the one about bullrushing the opposing wizard has made me realize that I should play a monk.
I also play in a min/max heavy group with a bloodthirsty DM. But I still want to play a monk. They aren't better at any one role at anything, but the versatility makes them just nasty. Qingong monk is a beautiful archetype and there's alot that can be done with it. Reminds me of the versatility of playing a 3.5 binder.
I also play in a min/max heavy group with a bloodthirsty DM. But I still want to play a monk. They aren't better at any one role at anything, but the versatility makes them just nasty. Qingong monk is a beautiful archetype and there's alot that can be done with it. Reminds me of the versatility of playing a 3.5 binder.
Hydraulic push + greater bull rush. Lovely. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A fact that keeps getting overlooked is that Wis and Dex, both impact just about everything for a Monk (and this becomes even more true with agile manuevers and both weapon finesse, and power attack).
That means that while other characters are buying more powerful magic weapons, armor, etc., the monk can go much further by just buying stat boosters.
In another thread I'm building a 28pt buy polearm fighter...i think this comment along with the one about bullrushing the opposing wizard has made me realize that I should play a monk.
I also play in a min/max heavy group with a bloodthirsty DM. But I still want to play a monk. They aren't better at any one role at anything, but the versatility makes them just nasty. Qingong monk is a beautiful archetype and there's alot that can be done with it. Reminds me of the versatility of playing a 3.5 binder.
Nice, I hope that works out! One of the benefits of playing a monk with a bloodthirsty DM is that they can't really design encounters that play to your weaknesses, because you have defense from all corners.
And no thanks in advance to the people who will say monks have no advantages. I've outlined several above.To the people who have said "I've seen all this before and have argued it down elsewhere..." I'm sorry that I didn't trawl through endless pages of posts just to make sure I'd never repeated anything said before. Maybe I said it better, in my own essayist manner. Or maybe I didn't, and I should have wasted an enormous amount of time tracking down your arguments and reading them. Next time I'll be sure to avoid writing anything, so as not to bore you.
Sincerely,
-Moox