Yes, I think the first time I saw that assertion was in the writings of Treeant Monk (very smart guy). But as Dabbler was getting at, I don't think it always holds true. If you have all the bases covered and then you add a fifth character there are arguments to be made in support of a fifth-wheel/jack-of-all class. I'm not sure if they out weigh the arguments in favor of two specialists double-teaming the crap out of 1 of your 4 bases (especially if its one of the important bases that stacks with itself well like meat shield or wizard), but some advantages are there.
Well, the way I look at it, you have five specialists for four specialities, then you only have a spare for one of them, and no spare for the others. If you have a generalist and four specialists, and one specialist goes down, you still have their boots partially filled.
I can see good reasons to say that the monk isn't much of a fifth wheel, but speaking more largely about a jack of all trades- the fifth wheel doesn't sit around waiting for the specialists to die. He adjusts for small situational deficiencies every round.
Exactly - the generalist helps the specialists do their job better - something I mentioned above but that Stephanie inexplicably failed to see, can't think why.
Yes, I think the first time I saw that assertion was in the writings of Treeant Monk (very smart guy). But as Dabbler was getting at, I don't think it always holds true. If you have all the bases covered and then you add a fifth character there are arguments to be made in support of a fifth-wheel/jack-of-all class. I'm not sure if they out weigh the arguments in favor of two specialists double-teaming the crap out of 1 of your 4 bases (especially if its one of the important bases that stacks with itself well like meat shield or wizard), but some advantages are there.Well, the way I look at it, you have five specialists for four specialities, then you only have a spare for one of them, and no spare for the others. If you have a generalist and four specialists, and one specialist goes down, you still have their boots partially filled.
I can see good reasons to say that the monk isn't much of a fifth wheel, but speaking more largely about a jack of all trades- the fifth wheel doesn't sit around waiting for the specialists to die. He adjusts for small situational deficiencies every round.Exactly - the generalist helps the specialists do their job better - something I mentioned above but that Stephanie inexplicably failed to see, can't think why.
I just want to say that I like monks (and the other hybrid classes) being referred to as generalists as opposed to support classes; the latter makes me think of side-kicks, as I mentioned in a previous post. Generalist, on the other hand, helps paint a better picture of just what the class does. Well done!
Monks [...] are certainly the most mobile characters in the game.Aha. Oho.
Sorry, it can't be helped when I read "Monk are mobile".
Enhancement bonus to base speed; "enhancement" means it doesn't stack with anything: until level 12, a monk is slower than a barbarian with haste. And after that level, a monk doesn't fly. Which makes his base speed irrelevant. Meh.
Cherry pick less please. The barbarians +10 is eaten by medium armor. Both classes benefit from haste the same amount. I've already approached what they do when they get there. Since you don't believe in non specialists, I won't waste your time.
End game wizard
So that's a wizard for a 10-11th level party to fight, right? APL+5? If that's the case this wizard is meant to fight FOUR people, each who compliments the other. It might be someone else who burns the wizard's quickened dim door, and it might be the monk who catches up to him with a fly spell cast by the party wizard. If the part doesn't have invisibility purge or some such, the monks high perception is their best chance to catch the wizard. But as soon as the monk catches up to the wizard, he can pretzel him, forcing a to make a concentration check every time he wants to cast a spell that somatic/material components.
. I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge that there may be some builds that make him a better fighter than the fighter, but I'm not aware of them and I think they'd probably require some character investment that would detract from his versatility.Fighting is about versatility.
The fighter is good for one and only one fighting scenario: there's a visible monster within reach. Because his numbers are higher than anyone else.
That's great, but, huh, anyone can do damages. Bards can do a fair amount of damages, even if it's less than a fighter. Now, let's compare two party.
Party A: fighter, cleric, rogue, wizard.
Party B: melee bard, cleric, rogue, wizard. When there are visible monsters within reach, Party B deals more damages than party A. The bard does a fair amount of damages, and he makes the difference with the fighter by increasing the damages of the cleric and the rogue.
In a more complex situation, he can also help. eg: the bard can dispel a fly spell, stun a flying monster with sound burst, remove a fear effect with remove fear, remove invisibility with glitterdust. In those situation, the fighter can only wait for the cleric or the wizard to enable him.
In any fighting situation, party B is doing better. Since the only difference is the bard, it means the bard is better than the fighter at fighting.
And that's the key idea: fighters aren't good at fighting, they're good at "hitting thing at reach". In my experience, it's not a useful speciality for any scenario more complex than "here is a monster, he doesn't have any weird ability, and you must beat him to death".
Seems like we got our wires crossed. I seemed to have interpreted your original comment to mean that the Bard could fill a fighter's role better than a fighter. It seems what you are saying is that a bard is overall more effective in a fight than a fighter. I don't have an opinion one way or the other about that assertion, but I do think that the picture of the bard you paint in your comment would still rather not be the only thing standing between the party's god-wizard and BBEG, whereas that is exactly where the fighter should be at all times.
EDIT: I'd also like to throw out into the general conversation, that atleast one monk archetype changes his role entirely: Zen Archer. It basically makes him one of the better Striker builds in the game.
Open the boot of your car, see that spare wheel? Is it useless? I mean, it's not attached to an axle, it has no power to it - it's not even in contact with the road! Useless, right? Not if you lose another one it isn't.You mean that the role of the monk is to wait until some real PC dies? Uh, great role.
Anyway, how is he better at this "role" than any real class?
Yeah, the Monk survives (doesn't defeat enemy if no one else can't) so he can bring everyone back to town for a raise.
I think that is his role.
Open the boot of your car, see that spare wheel? Is it useless? I mean, it's not attached to an axle, it has no power to it - it's not even in contact with the road! Useless, right? Not if you lose another one it isn't.You mean that the role of the monk is to wait until some real PC dies? Uh, great role.
Anyway, how is he better at this "role" than any real class?
Yeah, the Monk survives (doesn't defeat enemy if no one else can't) so he can bring everyone back to town for a raise.
I think that is his role.
Sadly, I think there's some truth in that. To the extent that he is useful, the majority of his usefulness comes from being able to survive a lot of different kinds of situations, not really his ability to actively solve problems.
@Atarlost: I largely agree with you. I tend to think of the party as a whole in terms of what can it accomplish and what can it survive. That's probably because I GM 90% more often than I PC. When someone's making a PC, its generally helpful for them to try to figure out what holes are there to be filled in the Party's repertoire and step into those holes. Often this can be difficult to see with detail for a given player who doesn't have access to everyone else's character sheets, so its helpful to view characters in terms of broad class roles. That said, I think its more fun for everyone to just roll up whatever character they want to play, and then organically try to meld them all into a functional party.
Exactly - the generalist helps the specialists do their job better - something I mentioned above but that Stephanie inexplicably failed to see, can't think why.Oh. I see the problem.
You think that "generalist" is the contrary of "specialist". that's not the case: a commoner isn't a specialist, but he's not a generalist either.
To be a generalist, a character must be doing well in many different field of expertise. The monk doesn't. He's mediocre at melee, he's mediocre at skills, he has a high speed but mediocre mobility, and... That's it. "Being mediocre at some task" is not the profile of a generalist.
Oh. I see the problem.
You think that 'generalist' means 'specialist at several things' when in fact it means moderately good at several things.
So looking at the monk:
Mediocre at melee - check, he's better than most second rank fighters, not as good (usually) as a pure fighter.
Mediocre at skills - check, he hasn't a huge number of ranks but he can be good at some things like stealth and perception.
He also gets a few 'magic' tricks too, and is very mobile. He's got a range of abilities without putting any of the specialists out of a job - looks like a generalist to me.
stuff
Right. Just because you think the Monk is a sub-optimal class(as I do), doesn't mean you can deny the things that he can do better than a lot of other classes. He is more mobile than most fighters. He can sneak better than most clerics. He can sense motive better than most wizards. He can do more damage than most bards. He can survive spells better than just about anyone, except a wizard who has anticipated what kind of spells he's going to have cast against him. If an enemy is great at sundering or disarming, the the monk is better equipped to take him out than most fighters. And so on.
Stephane's analogy is faulty, in that the commoner really doesn't have anything it can do better than anyone else.
Anyway, I asked what can a monk do that a magus can't do better, nobody responded. I asked it because the magus also gets a few 'magic' tricks. being weaker than an other class at everything doesn't look like a generalist.
Fine fine. Since that's what you want. A monk doesn't need a weapon to use his main class features. A monk doesn't turn into a bad fighter in an antimagic field.
Really when I start lookin at archetypes and start looking at the arguments in this thread against monks I'm wondering if people are ignoring the archetypes entirely.
At any level, I prefer the barbarian bonus...
Sweet, I'll take a dip of it with my Martial Artist then. Thank you helpful sir!
I posted this in another place.
1) Convert Monks to full BAB class with d10 HPs.
2) Reduce Monk movement bonuses to +5' per increment, rather than +10'. Allow the Monk to spend a Ki point to add this bonus to their 5' step and still be able to attack.
3) Re-skin Amulet of Mighty Fists to Gi of Mighty Fists (or Mr. Roger's Sweater Vest of Uncompromisng Awesome) and make it incompatible with wearing armor and let it go as high on plussage as a magic weapon can. Make it 3500 GP per step rather than 5,000 GP per step so that a Monk at 3rd level can get one by WBL rather than waiting until 5th level.
4) Add the ki power "walk on air" so that the monk can run across tree tops or through mid-air at his full run speed and grapple the damned flying invisible wizard with ha-ha-fsck-you active. I recommend that it cost 2 ki points, last for 2 rounds per level, and be made to look awesome with super high jump ki powers.
5) Add the ki ability "Dispelling touch." The monk can spend two ki point as an immediate action and make a touch attack to dispel all spells on the target, using his Monk level as the caster-level.
Make these changes, and nobody will gripe about the Monk not having a role in the party. His role is to get close to high value target and biatch slap it into submission.
Anyway, I asked what can a monk do that a magus can't do better, nobody responded. I asked it because the magus also gets a few 'magic' tricks. being weaker than an other class at everything doesn't look like a generalist.
Fine fine. Since that's what you want. A monk doesn't need a weapon to use his main class features. A monk doesn't turn into a bad fighter in an antimagic field.
Seeing as he loses magic bonuses to Str, Dex, Con, Wis... yeah.
Compare to a Barbarian? He keeps his Str bonus in an Antimagic field. And his Rage powers.
Anyway, I asked what can a monk do that a magus can't do better, nobody responded. I asked it because the magus also gets a few 'magic' tricks. being weaker than an other class at everything doesn't look like a generalist.
Fine fine. Since that's what you want. A monk doesn't need a weapon to use his main class features. A monk doesn't turn into a bad fighter in an antimagic field.
Seeing as he loses magic bonuses to Str, Dex, Con, Wis... yeah.
Compare to a Barbarian? He keeps his Str bonus in an Antimagic field. And his Rage powers.
He was asking in comparison to a magus.
However compared to a barbarian who doesn't lose anythign this is true.
Same is true for fighters, rogues, and to some extent paladins and rangers.
As for "Monks can't fly or see invisible people," well neither can most characters.Alchemist, bard, cleric, druid, inquisitor, magus, oracle, sorcerer, summoner, witch and wizard can. That's 11 classes out of 19: the majority of the classes can.
How do Bards, Clerics(except for 2 domains), Druids, Inquisitors, and Oracles get to fly? Isn't that one 6.5 out of 19.
@dabbler: that' the same for every field of expertise: the monk is always one of the ten worst classes. eg: melee; barbarian, cavalier, druid, fighter, inquisitor, magus, paladin, ranger, and the summoner's eidolon are better than the monk in melee. eg: skills; even the magus is better than a monk in skills (Int as a secondary ability, familiar).
...
Anyway, I asked what can a monk do that a magus can't do better, nobody responded. I asked it because the magus also gets a few 'magic' tricks. being weaker than an other class at everything doesn't look like a generalist.
I think the OP initially asked that this not become a 'do monks suck?' thread (they do) but instead asked this to be a 'to the extent that monks are useful, what are their uses' thread.
He also gets a few 'magic' tricks too, and is very mobile. He's got a range of abilities without putting any of the specialists out of a job - looks like a generalist to me.Huh.
His 'range' of ability is:
walk.
hit things.
That's not very generalist.
In addition to walking and hitting things a core monk (to say nothing of archetypes) gets the following psuedo magic abilities:
-Stunning fist and Ki pool, if you want to count em.-Abundant Step
-Wholeness of Body
-Tongue of Son and Moon
-Quivering Palm
@Adastragames- Wow, I really like number 1. It's so obvious that I can't believe its not already RAW.
Thanks for clearing up my flying question, point conceded. I haven't really seen everything some of these spell casting classes can do.
As for the rest, I wasn't saying that these are great abilities, I was just saying that counter to Gatfomki's point the monk has some magic-like abilities. Spells can be defensive and situational like the monk's abilities. I would say that none of them are like just another version of hitting things. Ki pool is sort of like a haste spell in that it lets you do more on your turn than you are supposed to and buffs your AC. Stunning fist is like a decent low to mid level debuffing spell, and quivering palm is like a high level death spell. Hitting things typically just does damage to them, which is one of the reason casters are generally better than fighters.
That leaves Abundant Step, which is a nice ability. If only it enabled them to do their job, but since they can't take an action after using it they can't use it to get themselves airborne to take out flying casters.
When discussing a class, it helps to know what their abilities are.
Abundant Step (Su)
At 12th level or higher, a monk can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door. Using this ability is a move action that consumes 2 points from his ki pool. His caster level for this effect is equal to his monk level. He cannot take other creatures with him when he uses this ability.
So, I abundant step. Into the airspace of the flying mage. As a move action. What do I do with my standard action, I wonder? I grapple him to A) avoid falling and B) keep him from casting spells on my buddies. Oh, C) I shove his spiny iguana familiar someplace where the sun don't shine...
Now, if you're planning on flying above the combat, how often do you cast freedom of movement on yourself, just in case?
That leaves Abundant Step, which is a nice ability. If only it enabled them to do their job, but since they can't take an action after using it they can't use it to get themselves airborne to take out flying casters.When discussing a class, it helps to know what their abilities are.
Abundant Step (Su)
At 12th level or higher, a monk can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door. Using this ability is a move action that consumes 2 points from his ki pool. His caster level for this effect is equal to his monk level. He cannot take other creatures with him when he uses this ability.
So, I abundant step. Into the airspace of the flying mage. As a move action. What do I do with my standard action, I wonder? I grapple him to A) avoid falling and B) keep him from casting spells on my buddies. Oh, C) I shove his spiny iguana familiar someplace where the sun don't shine...
Read your own post. "as if using the spell dimension door"
UC even states "Normal: you can't take any actions after using" for Dimension Feats (feats that augment dimension door/Abundant step)So you can't grapple anyone because you are disallowed actions.
That leaves Abundant Step, which is a nice ability. If only it enabled them to do their job, but since they can't take an action after using it they can't use it to get themselves airborne to take out flying casters.When discussing a class, it helps to know what their abilities are.
Abundant Step (Su)
At 12th level or higher, a monk can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door. Using this ability is a move action that consumes 2 points from his ki pool. His caster level for this effect is equal to his monk level. He cannot take other creatures with him when he uses this ability.
So, I abundant step. Into the airspace of the flying mage. As a move action. What do I do with my standard action, I wonder? I grapple him to A) avoid falling and B) keep him from casting spells on my buddies. Oh, C) I shove his spiny iguana familiar someplace where the sun don't shine...
Read your own post. "as if using the spell dimension door"
UC even states "Normal: you can't take any actions after using" for Dimension Feats (feats that augment dimension door/Abundant step)So you can't grapple anyone because you are disallowed actions.
Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards? I don't have Ultimate Combat, but I do have the Core Rules.
In one round, you get one move action and one standard action.
Abundant step is a move action.
Therefore, you can Abundant Step as your move action, and make an attack or combat maneuver as your standard action
Dimension Door is a standard action normally, and its wording is specifically meant to prohibit the caster from Dimension Dooring somewhere and casting Quickened Lighting Bolt in the same round; it does not, for example, prevent any passengers carried by the Dimension Door using caster from using whatever standard actions they are entitled to.
|
Abundant step is a move action.Therefore, you can Abundant Step as your move action, and make an attack or combat maneuver as your standard action
Actually you can't. He's right, this was clarified in UC. They added a feat that allows you do to it, which means you can Quivering Palm after abundant step, but you need to take a feat to do so.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-agility
And since it is a move action, you can throw a swift action in on top of it to burn ki point to make sure it hits.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-assault
And later even better
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-dervish
Sure this burns feats, but keep in mind that Monk is 2nd only to the fighter in bonus feats and doesn't need pre-requisites for the monk feats like spring attack.
Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards?
That's a good question, Ken, but is is how it works, by a literal reading, by the statement of James Jacobs on these boards and, implicitly, by the fact that the new-in-Ultimate Combat feat Dimensional Agility specifically allows you to take remaining actions after using abundant step.
Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards?That's a good question, Ken, but is is how it works, by a literal reading, by the statement of James Jacobs on these boards and, implicitly, by the fact that the new-in-Ultimate Combat feat Dimensional Agility specifically allows you to take remaining actions after using abundant step.
It is kind of lame that they decided to create a feat tax to use the ability as it was intended.
|
|
It is kind of lame that they decided to create a feat tax to use the ability as it was intended.Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards?That's a good question, Ken, but is is how it works, by a literal reading, by the statement of James Jacobs on these boards and, implicitly, by the fact that the new-in-Ultimate Combat feat Dimensional Agility specifically allows you to take remaining actions after using abundant step.
I don't disagree, but the other feats they added to go along make up for it for me.
I don't disagree, but the other feats they added to go along make up for it for me.It is kind of lame that they decided to create a feat tax to use the ability as it was intended.Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards?That's a good question, Ken, but is is how it works, by a literal reading, by the statement of James Jacobs on these boards and, implicitly, by the fact that the new-in-Ultimate Combat feat Dimensional Agility specifically allows you to take remaining actions after using abundant step.
I agree that the feats are great, but I don't like that you have to wait so long to get them. Not to mention the fact that there are a lot of them; the entire chain is five feats, and you don't qualify for the first until 12th level.
I agree that the feats are great, but I don't like that you have to wait so long to get them. Not to mention the fact that there are a lot of them; the entire chain is five feats, and you don't qualify for the first until 12th level.I don't disagree, but the other feats they added to go along make up for it for me.It is kind of lame that they decided to create a feat tax to use the ability as it was intended.Then why would it specify that Abundant Step is a move action if you cannot Abundant Step and take a Standard Action afterwards?That's a good question, Ken, but is is how it works, by a literal reading, by the statement of James Jacobs on these boards and, implicitly, by the fact that the new-in-Ultimate Combat feat Dimensional Agility specifically allows you to take remaining actions after using abundant step.
For monks, yes. For the casting classes you can get them as early as 7th.
What’s a monks role?
Ranged damage dealer
- Zen archer
- Sohei with weapon training in bows
- Weapon adept focused on shuriken
Melee damage dealer
- Monk of the four winds using styles from UC
- Master of many styles also using styles from UC
Moderately tanky warrior
- Martial artist
- Drunken master/monk of the sacred mountain
(not the best of damage but durable and fun to play)
Support
- Maneuver master
- Tetori
- Ki Mystic/Monk of the Lotus/Sensei
Scout
- Master of many styles
- Most dexterity based monk builds
Monks have a number of roles they can fill and while not all of them are optimal choices they are effective ones. What I listed wasn’t all of them, but I hopefully it’s enough to defuse some of the monk hate that seems to be starting to crop up in this thread. Honestly read the archetypes and the new feats, paizo has improved the monk considerably.
Oh and the mage in the earlier post would be in a lot of trouble if he was attacked by a tetori with the dimensional agility feat. At level 15 they can both suppress freedom of movement and dimensionally lock their opponent. The only difficulty would be locating him and, imho, if no one in a party of adventurers of around 13th-15th level could deal with invisibility they deserve to get beat up. Not to mention the fact that the monk has probably got a +18 or so to their perception at that level, which is more then enough to find someone that’s invisible but in combat.
What’s a monks role?
Melee damage dealer
- Monk of the four winds using styles from UC
- Master of many styles also using styles from UC
Wouldn't enforcer + Shatter Defenses + Medusa's wrath be a better damage dealer? The combo guarantees you get 2 extra attacks.
Drawback: nonlethal.
What’s a monks role?
Melee damage dealer
- Monk of the four winds using styles from UC
- Master of many styles also using styles from UC
Wouldn't enforcer + Shatter Defenses + Medusa's wrath be a better damage dealer? The combo guarantees you get 2 extra attacks.
Drawback: nonlethal.
I'm a little confused about what you're asking, are you asking if that's a better combination for a monk or for someone else? I need sleep so I'll check back tomorrow and try to answer your question.
Since apparently nobody looked at what I linked last page, here's something relevant to the topic from SKR:
1.) The way you make it sound is as if that will not happen until Pathfinder Second Edition.Fortunately, that's not the case. There are several things in the game that are on the "to do" list for having a major FAQ about and the consequences of that will result in a significant rewrite/clarification of their text in the Core Rulebook. (For example, Stealth/hide in plain sight is one of them.) I have a list of these things, we (the designers) need to hammer out these issues together. I had expected that to happen before Gen Con, but some deadlines moved up and now it'll be after. Anyway, "does the monk need to be fixed" could be one of those issues, if we think it is serious enough.
From here.
I posted this in another place.
1) Convert Monks to full BAB class with d10 HPs.
4) Add the ki power "walk on air" so that the monk can run across tree tops or through mid-air at his full run speed and grapple the damned flying invisible wizard with ha-ha-fsck-you active. I recommend that it cost 2 ki points, last for 2 rounds per level, and be made to look awesome with super high jump ki powers.
5) Add the ki ability "Dispelling touch." The monk can spend two ki point as an immediate action and make a touch attack to dispel all spells on the target, using his Monk level as the caster-level.
I could certainly agree to these two improving the monk, but it's still far from useless as is.
I played NWN1 on a hun server (RP) and the maker of the module played with a monk. he easily killed and beated everything in the module by himself alone! Its just a good traits and skill choices thing....
Unarmed attacks rockz if monk! So means that they are DPS and a bit of rogue! Depends on the skill choices...
Honestly read the archetypes and the new feats
I did that. And honestly: every archetype is far more powerful than a core monk. Either:
· The core monk is balanced, and therefore the monk with any archetype is the most powerful class in the game.
· The core monk is underpowered.I think all of the monk hate come from this: the monk were a very well-balanced class, and now he's so OP that none of the other classes is really relevant compared to the monk. Peoples don't like when a class is so powerful that it's the only meaningful choice.
Actually I tend to think that the core monk is a little underpowered making the archetypes closer to where they should be. I’ve always felt they needed to make the following changes.
d10 hit die
full BAB
(really does anyone disagree with those two?)
increase their enhanced movement by ten
increase their armor bonus by 1
shift their hand to hand combat damage up one or two levels so they get higher damage a litte sooner
Another thing I’d like to see is their bonus feat include stunning fist and its replacements so they can get them at a lower level. I include stunning fist for the archetypes that don’t have it. Also, I’d like to see monks taking these feats get the “monk” versions rather then the pure feat. So, for example, elemental fist would do better damage for higher level monks.
Finally I’d like to see spell resistance changed so that it either works like a saving throw, only against magic the monk decides to resist, or at least is easier to drop and put back up.
Personally I don’t think the monk is much weaker than the other base classes and mainly needs several minor adjustments to bring them in line with them. I believe the above would be sufficient to do this. But naturally that’s just my opinion.