|
One combatant generates a monk; the other generates a fighter. Both characters are created using PFS rules (20 point buy, only core PC races, 2 PFS-legal traits, 150 gp). Each combatant would generate a character and post the character on this thread, neither seeing the other's character until combat begins.
The two would begin by rolling for initiative, posting the result of the roll in this thread. Then each would describe actions and movement, including die rolls as needed. Of course, this is all on the honor system.
These two characters fight on a 105' square (21 x 21) battlefield.
Location
(0,0): Southwest corner
(0,20): Southeast corner
(20,0): Northwest corner
(20,20): Northeast corner
The monk starts in square (0,0), the fighter in square (20,20).
Paizo people, please feel free to lock this if you think it is a bad idea. I'm OK with that.
|
TREAG RAZORWIND
I draw my bow and fire one arrow on my turn, use my move action to keep distance from the fighter.
If on the second round I am still NOT in melee range of the fighter I full attack with 3 shots, if any of these miss I use perfect strike to try again. If the fighter is in range I drop the bow and begin my unarmed strikes, use my move action to draw my potion.
|
|
TREAG RAZORWIND ** spoiler omitted **
I don't know how to determine init so I will assume a 10, with an init of +3.
I draw my bow and fire one arrow on my turn, use my move action to keep distance from the fighter.
If on the second round I am still NOT in melee range of the fighter I full attack with 3 shots, if any of these miss I use perfect strike to try again. If the fighter is in range I drop the bow and begin my unarmed strikes, use my move action to draw my potion.
When a fighter shows up, roll init. Take it from there.
|
|
Mr. "in Black":
You make many good points. I admit that I started the thread in response to the thousands of "monks rule" and "monks drool" threads. I thought it might be interesting to see how one-on-one combat played out.
Thank you for saying my idea isn't crazy.
Incidentally, I work in a school and every morning put a quotation on the board in my room. May I use the one on your description page?
Brother Sapo, a thing I wish to point out: I doubt there are many Monk "haters" and if they exist, they just ignore the class saying that does not fit with the theme of Bards, Druids and Paladins.
People who criticize rules of a class end to do it because they love it, and think that class didn't get the love and attention deserved.
A few questions:
1) What's to stop someone from making a character just to defeat the one posted? The only thing I see is the honor system and I don't trust that on the internet
2) Why do they start 20 feet away? This takes away the advantage of mobility for the monk. Why not provide some terrain and have them start the appropriate average distance from each other?
3) How are you going to account for skills such as Acrobatics and Stealth?
4) Why is the monk being compared to a fighter? Are other classes allowed, like the barbarian?
5) What will this demonstrate? Will it show which class is better or who has better character building skills?
6) Are you going to consider levels over level 1? At this level it can often come down to a single hit which only shows who got luckier with the dice.
2) Why do they start 20 feet away?
I've asked the same question watching "Deadliest Warrior". Also, just got your name (my wife just finished watching "Arrested Development" - the entire series). Can you tell I have netflix?
2) Why do they start 20 feet away?Re-read arena dimensions.
These two characters fight on a 105' square (21 x 21) battlefield.
Location
(0,0): Southwest corner
(0,20): Southeast corner
(20,0): Northwest corner
(20,20): Northeast cornerThe monk starts in square (0,0), the fighter in square (20,20).
That's 21 5' squares x 21 5' squares. They are starting at opposite corners, so the distance of 20 squares on a diagonal. With 2 diagonal squares counting as 15', that would put them 150' apart at the start.
Dice rolls don't have to be on the honor system since the message board has a built in dice roller.
Granted I don't see a real point to this particular exercise. At 1st level the difference is a couple of HP, a couple of points of Attack Bonus and Weapon Damage. Not counting magic, that is the difference between almost any two classes at 1st level. If you want to compare 2 classes you would need to at the very least compare at multiple points, like 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th. Additionally, you would be better served not pitting them against each other, but each against the same opponent, running the encounter multiple times to allow for variance in dice rolls.
It's not the Monk that is hated so much as the flaws in it's mechanics. It is reliant on more attribute scores than other classes, making it harder to focus your attributes which the game rewards. Additionally, flurry of blows being a full round action is directly at odds with class features that focus on mobility. You can move or flurry, but you can't do both. It's gear restricted in a game where gear=power. The Monk's problem is that it's mechanics are at conflict with the overall mechanics of the game and with themselves.
I misread the dimensions. Thanks. That does help the monk. At low levels the monk's mobility may help. He probably doesn't need to worry about flurry much at level 1.
I'm not going to debate the merits of the monk in this thread so I don't derail anything. I was mostly curious about the merits of such an exercise.
Oh, the honor system was about the builds. He said to post them without looking at the other builds. I don't see that happening.
Fighter
HP 13
AC 17
Init +5 (Reactionary)
Greatsword +6 2d6+6
CMB +5
CMD 18
Will save +0
Target AC 17
Hit: 50%
Dmg: 8-18
Power attack
Hit: 45%
Dmg: 10-20
Monk
HP 10
AC 17
Init +6 (Reactionary)
Unarmed +4 d6+1
Flurry +3/+3 d6+1
CMB +1
CMD 18
Stunning Fist DC 13
Hit: 60%
Target AC 17
Hit: 40%
Dmg: 2-7
Flurry
Hit: 35%/35%
Dmg: 2-7 or 4-14
Level 1 is still a bit of a toss up, but it seems at 50% success, the Fighter wins
|
|
This type of PvP thing is often suggested (and summarily shot down) in gaming groups far and wide.
I'm of the opinion that to accurately gauge two classes against one another in combat, one would have to account for the infinite possible environments and circumstances that such battles could occur within.
If we were intellectually or technologically capable of doing such a thing, the resulting numbers would still hold little meaning.
If we ultimately learned that the monk was 2% worse than the fighter overall--what next? And vice versa?
Anyone else find the thread title out of sorts? The only monk-haters are the ones that don't like Eastern flavor in their Western setting. They wouldn't give this thread the time of day.
Agreed. It's like a single fight between two random people is going to solve the issue on whether the monk has problems or not.
