| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Currently there are several good threads around discussing the monks weaknesses and really nice monk redesigns. One often mentioned weakness is the monks disadvantage at hitting foes compared to the fighter. While I think that these arguments are valid, I'm wondering how the monk compares to the fighter when not concentrating on this aspect.
In various threads there have been made quite valid comparisons of the monk to the ranger and paladin, too, which I won't touch here, though.
For doing the comparison I'd like to try to match features of the fighter with features of the monk which are similar in purpose or power (up to level 20).
Ok, let's try:
HD: fighter has +1 hp per level which is approximately worth a feat (Toughness).
Skills: monk has +2 ranks per level, so he can select the hp as favored class bonus to cancel out the HD advantage and is still 1 rank per level ahead (assuming the character is not built to maximize hp).
=> monk +1 rank per level if not built to maximize hp
BAB: monk has full BAB for flurry and CMB but only 3/4 BAB for standard actions and CMD. Standard actions are not much of a problem in my eyes, because usually that's just one single attack (the first) when connecting with the foe and the monk can easily choose a maneuver for that, e.g. trip, disarm or grapple. Reduced BAB means that monk may qualify for some feats later or cannot use them as effectively
=> monk effectively behind on CMD and BAB based feat selection
Saves: monk has two more good saves
Attributes: monk has MAD but then every attribute counts for something, so he gets something back. Many moderate attributes even give a higher total of modifiers than one or two high attributes (when built with points). So the fighter can better concentrate on one thing (hitting and damage), but the monk will have much higher acrobatics, perception, sense motive and stealth values (skill ranks + more attribute bonuses).
Bonus feats: fighter gets 11 bonus feats, monk gets 6, so fighter is 5 feats ahead. Both are restricted in their choice, the monk even more, but there are enough nice feats to be chosen from, so that this should not be a problem.
Class features:
- bravery: fighter gets +5 on fear saves only. Monk has good will save, so will be +6 ahead on will saves in general and +1 on fear saves (not counting still mind which gives another +2).
- armor training: fighter can apply Dex bonuses to AC although wearing armor, monk will get Wis bonus to armor and +5 AC bonus. Fighter may wear armor and shield for up to +12 to AC (+ magical bonuses up to +10) whereas monk will get Wis bonus +5 (Wis enhancements apply). If monk wears bracers of armor he should have competitive AC while having vastly better touch AC.
- armor mastery: fighter gets DR 5/- if using armorer shield, whereas monk gets DR 10/chaotic which is even better (or do chaotic creatures count as chaotic aligned weapons at high enough HD?)
- weapon training: fighter gets +4/+4 on his favored weapon group and less on others. This I would rate to be equal to about 6 feats.
From bonus feats and (fighter) class features looked at the fighter has an advantage of about 11 feats. The rest was about comparable.
Let's see whether the monk's class features are worth 11 feats:
- flurry of blows: about 3 feats (the 3 TWF feats, although there are differences and the monk does not qualify to feats based on TWF feats, but then he didn't have to qualify for the TWF feats either)
- stunning fist, unarmed strike (2 feats)
- evasion, improved evasion (at least 1 feat, probably 2)
- diamond body, abundant step, empty body: very cool features (3 feats)
- ki swift actions (extra attack, +20 ft movement, +4 AC) (at least 1-2 feats)
- extra movement (at least 2 feats, heck there is a feat to get a paltry +5 move)
stopping here I already count at least 12-14 feats which is more than the 11 feats the fighter was ahead and the monk still has features left (High jump, Wholeness of body, Immunity to diseases, moderate spell resistance, quivering palm, slow fall and others)
Special fighter feats: only fighters have access to the weapon specialization feats giving large bonuses to hit and damage.
Summary: if you want to build a character maximizing combat damage then play a fighter (nothing new here) but if you are happy with moderate combat damage then you can play a monk and it is as powerful as the fighter (feat and feature wise). He might not be able to the BBEG but someone has to do something about his minions, too, right? And then there is not only fighting but scouting and social interaction (Cha might not be high, but Wis helps there, too).
Did I miss something stupid? Is the hitting weakness a crippling one which cannot be canceled by other features?
Comments welcome.
And now? Whats new?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like your approach :-)
I often reason in a similar way, you spelled it out nicely. Damage is often seen to be the only thing that counts :-/
You missed magic weapons if the monk can get G. Magic Fang permanently he is fine, but it seems most people ignore this option and buy an amulet of mighty fists witch is much more expensive then a normal magic weapon.
Without the bonus to hit and damage from magic weapons the monk falls a bit to far behind to be useful in combat and that is the key problem to make up for with mobility and noncombat skill.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I like this comparison, but Flurry of Blows should be ranked even higher (I'd say). If you compare it to the twf chain there are several advantages:
same damage with "each" hand = 1 feat
only one weapon/hand needed = cheaper gear
and others I am sure I forgot
And if you compare the twf fighter archetype to the monk, the monk will easily get the better AC and touch AC.
About Saves: Compared to a fighter the saves are superb, but compared to a paladin or an optimized barbarian they still come out low. On the other hand: Spell Resistance beginning with SR 24 at level 14 is extra-cool (if you are allowed to turn it off, say, after an encounter or as a standard action or whatever)
In a typical d&d campaign it is your unbeatable saves that will keep you alive in the long run.
It's probably harder for the monk overcoming DR (Martial Artist & Zen Archer I am NOT looking at you) - fighting two handed (mechanically) is not really an option for any monk, or is it?
Dotted for later comment.
Master Arminas
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An interesting approach, but I think there is a fatal flaw. It looks at the value of individual abilities, rather than the cohesive whole.
The Fighter piles on abilities to make him better at fighting. He is amazing at it, to the point it doesn't matter if his utility abilities aren't great. The Monk, with his weaker combat ability, needs comparatively more utility to make up for things. While he has a great number of different abilities, many of them are circumstantial, don't work well together, or are based solely on helping the Monk survive. Because of this, some find the overall contribution of Utility + Combat ability of the class to come out a bit low.
Personally, I think the class is totally fine, especially since Ultimate Combat. There are now enough unique and powerful tricks to bring both sides of the equation up enough for the class to proudly stand with the others. I can understand how people could still disagree, though I think a large part of the occasional "monk is weak" sentiment is just leftovers from the pre-UC era.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A campaign in which it doesn't matter if a character is useless outside of fighting sounds boring as all hell to me.
Since when does "utility abilities aren't great" equate to "useless outside of combat?" Shockingly enough, Fighters are heavily weighted towards being good at fighting. So good that, on the balance, people seem to like them. Monks combine fighting with a couple extra skill points and a grab bag of powers. Some people find the balancing of this to be off, such that the loss in fighting doesn't equal the gain in other utility. If you are in a particularly low combat campaign, things might come out differently. But for an AP or "traditional" campaign, this is the conclusion some people reach.
So, how useful is a Fighter outside of initiative time in your opinion, honestly?
We probably shouldn't derail the thread with a side argument about Fighters out-of-combat utility. If you want a (ridiculously extensive and long) discussion on the subject, you can try here. Or, if you start a new thread, I'll gladly go and argue like crazy with you over there.
Liam ap Thalwig; man you said a lot of stuff. So let’s go over that.
Hit Points: True, there is an average difference of 2 points at 1st level, and 1 point every level thereafter. Not a big deal, right? Wrong. Fighters are a SAD class, whereas Monks are the MADest class on the block (Single Attribute Dependency vs. Multiple Attribute Dependency, for those who haven’t been keeping up).
Fighters can get by with spending all their points on a good Strength, a decent Dex, and a decent Con. A 15-point buy could easily give a human, half-elf, or half-orc Fighter the following attributes: Str 17 (+2 racial; 7 points), Dex 14 (5 points), Con 14 (5 points), Int 10 (0 points), Wis 10 (0 points), Cha 8 (-2 points). A dwarf Fighter is a bit easier: Str 17 (13 points), Dex 14 (5 points), Con 14 (+2 racial; 2 points), Int 10 (0 points), Wis 11 (+2 racial; -1 points), Cha 6 (-2 racial, -4 points).
Monks need Strength, Dexterity, Wisdom, Constitution, and Intelligence (contrary to public opinions, Int is not a dump stat for monks; not if you want to actually USE those skills). That is a major disadvantage.
Still, both classes get enough hit points, they will probably put that Favored Class bonus into skills.
Saves: Fighters are at a disadvantage over Monks here. Good Fortitude vs. Good Everything.
Skills: Monks get 2 more skill points than the fighter. TWO. What that usually means is that the monk maxs out Acrobatics and Perception. They have to spend their other 3-4 skill points (might be more with a higher Int) on Stealth, usually a Knowledge, a few points on Climb and Swim. The Fighter spends his on Intimidate, Climb, Swim, and sometimes a Knowledge.
BAB: Fighters have a full BAB. Monks are (along with the Rogue) the only martial class that does not have spell casting abilities with a medium BAB. Yes, flurry of blows has their BAB figured at class level -2. Unfortunately, that doesn’t apply to a standard attack. Or a charge. Or a Spring Attack. Or an attack of opportunity. Or . . . you get the idea. A lot of people say that a Monk should use Combat Maneuvers instead of an attack on standard actions; the problem is that even after 3rd level (when a Monk gets Maneuver Training), he likely doesn’t have the Greater Maneuver feats. Plus, Combat Maneuvers quickly run out of steam against most monsters.
Feats: Fighters get 11 while Monks get 6—that they can pick. They get 5 more pre-determined feats or ‘virtual’ feats over the course of their career (Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, and the TWF chain). The six they can pick are from a very restricted list, although Monks do get to ignore the pre-requisites of those feats. None of the Greater Maneuver feats are on the list—and, outside of a handful of archetypes—neither is any feat that provides a constant increase to damage (Weapon Specialization or the like). Fighters can grab that and GWS and Greater Weapon Focus, putting their adjusted Attack Bonus at +3/+6 over a Monk using a flurry or a standard attack.
Fighter Class Features:
Bravery: Good ability, and the fighter gets a bonus that caps out at +5 on saves versus fear.
Armor Training: Excellent ability. Eventually fighters get to reduce their Armor Check Penalty and increase their maximum Dexterity Bonus by 4 points. And no, Fighters don’t need anything more than 14 Dex—by the time their Dex bonus from Armor Training hits +4, they will have a Belt of Physical Perfection +6, which will then apply their full Dex bonus to full plate.
Weapon Training: This is the bomb. No seriously. Here is where the Fighter just starts pulling away from the poor Monk. The Fighter eventually gets to pick FOUR (4) weapon groups which he can use with a variable bonus (+4, +3, +2, or +1 depending on which was picked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th) that applies on all to-hit rolls, on all damage rolls, and to all Combat Maneuver checks made with that weapon. Guess what? That Fighter just went from +3/+6 over a flurry/standard attack Monk to +7/+10, or +9/+12 with gloves of dueling. AND he gets to add +4 (+6 with the magical gloves) to his damage. Plus his bonus from Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization. That means the Fighter is doing his base weapon damage +10 before magic or Strength bonus. Suddenly that 2d10 unarmed damage of the Monk doesn’t seem so much better than the 1d8+10 or 1d10+10, or 1d12+10, or 2d6+10 from the Fighter, now does it?
Armor Mastery: DR 5/- whenever the Fighter wears armor or uses a shield? Have you ever seen a fighter actually NOT wear armor or use a shield? And that DR cannot be bypassed by anything.
Weapon Mastery: Automatically confirm critical hits with his chosen weapon. Very powerful, especially with all of the Critical feats Pathfinder introduced.
Against that we have:
Monk Class Abilities:
AC Bonus: Monks do get to add their Wis bonus to AC and CMD. Great! But they can’t wear armor. Eventually they get up to Wis+5 for that bonus. And before you say monks can get bracers of armor, a +8 bracers provides the same AC bonus as normal (non-masterwork) half-plate, but costs 64,000 gp compared to the 600 gp Half-Plate a Fighter can wear starting at 2nd or 3rd level.
Evasion: Hurray! Monks get evasion. Just likes Rogues and Rangers.
Fast Movement: Great. Now our 3rd level Monk is just as fast as a 1st level Barbarian. Unfortunately, the bonus to speed—which grows over time—is an enhancement bonus, so it doesn’t stack with any type of magical boots or spells.
Still Mind: A +2 bonus against enchantment spells and effects. Wow. I am so stunned by the awesome nature of this ability that . . . I am speechless.
Ki Pool: Ki gives the Monk to ability to do awesome things—the ki pool is criminally low, however. Compare it to Bardic Performance or Barbarian Rage. Those classes get 4 rounds of use at 1st level, plus 2 rounds every level gained thereafter. PLUS their Charisma or Constitution modifier. Monks gets ½ their level plus their Wisdom modifier. Seems like they got shafted here to. BUT WAIT! It gets better, because Monks get ki strike. Of course, they only get so long as they have 1 point remaining in their ki pool. And it only bypasses DR/magic at 4th level, DR/magic and lawful at 10th level, and DR/magic, lawful, and adamantine at 16th level. And they can ignore hardness of less of than 20 at 16th level. Useful, but the wording means that those unarmed strikes are NOT actual magic weapons; they just bypass damage reduction. Incorporeal creatures like to eat Monks. So do those with DR/cold iron, silver, good, evil, or chaos.
Slow Fall: Hah! It is like feather fall but worse! You have to be in arm’s reach of a wall and the progression is slow.
High Jump: Did Monks suddenly refuse to take Acrobatics? I mean why is this even an ability? Did the designers not realize that monks already get +24 on Jump checks (thanks to their speed) by 20th level? If it was a general bonus on ALL Acrobatics checks, that would be nice to help Monks tumble, but no. They jump real good; even better if they spend one of their few ki points.
Purity of Body: Nice ability. Monks are immune to disease. Situational, but nice.
Wholeness of Body: Oh boy. You mean, as a standard action, I can spend 2 points of my already extremely limited ki pool to heal a number of hit points equal to my monk level? Please shoot me now.
Improved Evasion: Nice. Of course Rogues and Rangers get this as well.
Diamond Body: Very nice. We are now immune to all poisons. Same as the druid. Isn’t there anything a Monk can do that isn’t already done by another class?
Abundant Step: Let me see if I understand, for 2 ki points I can dimension door as a move action, except it automatically ends my turn and I can’t take anyone with me? Underwhelming to say the least.
Quivering Palm: So, at 15th level, 1/day (that doesn’t increase), we can declare a quivering palm attack; if our to-hit roll misses it is wasted. Otherwise we deal damage. And can then have the target make a Fortitude save or die. If they save, no effect. Well, at least no other class can do this. Oh, wait. Forgot about Clerics, Wizards, and Sorcerers. Yeah, they get Saves or Die that actually do hit point damage on a failed save.
Timeless Body: Uh, when was the last time your characters aged enough that this ever became a factor?
Tongue of the Sun and Moon: So at 17th level, we can now do what Bards have been doing since 4th level, Clerics and Wizards since 5th level; and Sorcerers since 6th level.
Empty Body: Etherealness is nice, but 3 ki points and 19th level? Really?
Perfect Self: Finally, we gain DR 10/chaotic. But we are now outsiders. So certain helpful spells no longer have any effect on us. Gee. Thank you so very much.
SUMMARY: Monks have better saving throws than Fighters and they jump really, really well and have two extra skills. Everything else is highly situational and does not provide any edge in non-combat situations. In combat, Monks suffer from the syndrome diagnosed as ‘flurry of misses’ in 3.5, not being able to hit CR appropriate targets, or deal meaningful damage when they do hit. Properly equipped, a Fighter will not even be slowed down by a Monk, or fear him in any way. And that, gentlemen, is a crying shame.
Yes, Monks that are well-designed, well-equipped, and built for a specific purpose, played by a veteran player, can be done well. About on the same level as a first-time player who builds a Fighter and just picks cool sounding feats. And if the player who wants to run a Monk messes up? Makes the wrong choices? His character suffers a steep decline, whereas the Fighter is the energizer bunny that just keeps on going and going and going.
Master Arminas
I wish the monk had a lot of out-of-combat utility. While it certainly has more than the fighter, that's not much of a compliment. The only other classes where you could even begin to consider making the argument that the monk compares favorably to out-of-combat are the Gunslinger, the Cavalier/Samurai, the Paladin and the Barbarian. Everything else cleanly blows it miles out of the water. It's not just a matter of "yeah, man, but you just have to be creative with the monk." I am allowing for monk creativity; I'm just extending that allowance for creativity to other classes as well. Being at best sixth-worst at something isn't really a selling point. Trying to sell the Monk off of non-combat utility is like trying to sell the Summoner off of its incredible punching skills. You're not technically the worst, but you're pretty clearly in the bottom tier. The monk doesn't have out-of-combat utility. It has a lengthy list of -combat- features, a bonus to jumping, 4+int skill points with less ability to put points into int than just about any other class in the game, and a medium quantity of class skills. Oh, and the near-capstone ability to talk to anything. If monks were, bard-style, legitimately amazing at non-combat utility (or even average), then sure, that'd be a niche, I guess. They're just not.
So, excluding primary spell casters and sticking to core, your argument is that Rangers, Rogues, and Bards are more useful out of combat than Monks. I agree about Rogues and Bards, though I think Monks are better in combat than those two, but Rangers? Other than sneaking around (where it comes down to faster stealth vs. Hide in Plain Site), monks are better out of combat. They are always armed even when they appear not to be. Perception synergizes with their high Wisdom. They get Diplomacy as a class skill.
Rangers are a total blowout. They get at least two more skills/level than the monk, which is probably the nail in the coffin to begin with, but then they get a slew of assorted skill bonuses, the ability to use wands of several good support and survival spells (plus heals), the ability to call up any spell on their (admittedly limited list) with a little prep time, a companion who may have nonstandard senses or movement modes (plus even more skill points), etc. Rangers are not only a poor choice of target for "I think this actuall has less out-of-combat utility than the monk", they're one of the poorest choices.
An interesting approach, but I think there is a fatal flaw. It looks at the value of individual abilities, rather than the cohesive whole.
QFT. +1
I wish the monk had a lot of out-of-combat utility. While it certainly has more than the fighter, that's not much of a compliment. The only other classes where you could even begin to consider making the argument that the monk compares favorably to out-of-combat are the Gunslinger, the Cavalier/Samurai, the Paladin and the Barbarian. Everything else cleanly blows it miles out of the water. It's not just a matter of "yeah, man, but you just have to be creative with the monk." I am allowing for monk creativity; I'm just extending that allowance for creativity to other classes as well. Being at best sixth-worst at something isn't really a selling point. Trying to sell the Monk off of non-combat utility is like trying to sell the Summoner off of its incredible punching skills. You're not technically the worst, but you're pretty clearly in the bottom tier. The monk doesn't have out-of-combat utility. It has a lengthy list of -combat- features, a bonus to jumping, 4+int skill points with less ability to put points into int than just about any other class in the game, and a medium quantity of class skills. Oh, and the near-capstone ability to talk to anything. If monks were, bard-style, legitimately amazing at non-combat utility (or even average), then sure, that'd be a niche, I guess. They're just not.So, excluding primary spell casters and sticking to core, your argument is that Rangers, Rogues, and Bards are more useful out of combat than Monks. I agree about Rogues and Bards, though I think Monks are better in combat than those two, but Rangers? Other than sneaking around (where it comes down to faster stealth vs. Hide in Plain Site), monks are better out of combat. They are always armed even when they appear not to be. Perception synergizes with their high Wisdom. They get Diplomacy as a class skill.
Uh, Monks do not get Diplomacy as a class skill. And, quite frankly, Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, Bards, and Rogues are all more useful out of combat than the monk! Along with all four primary casters. They are on par--out of combat--with Fighters. In combat, they are outclassed by EVERYONE.
Master Arminas
I like this comparison, but Flurry of Blows should be ranked even higher (I'd say). If you compare it to the twf chain there are several advantages:
same damage with "each" hand = 1 feat
You are right, I forgot to account for that feat.
Uh, Monks do not get Diplomacy as a class skill. And, quite frankly, Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, Bards, and Rogues are all more useful out of combat than the monk! Along with all four primary casters. They are on par--out of combat--with Fighters. In combat, they are outclassed by EVERYONE.
Hmm, our paladin has not a lot to show for skills. He can't climb very good (with all that armor, but even without he's far worse than my monk), although he did roll very good recently even out climbing my monk at the beginning :-)
He can't move silently (not even without armor but much less when wearing it). He has not a lot of knowledge skills. Acrobatics? Nope. He's probably better at talking having a higher charisma but then he's quite skill point starved so he hasn't put much into Cha based skills either.He is slow (I'm already twice as fast as him and even faster when running).
He's much better at fighting of course but I'm trying to evaluate what the monk gets as replacement for his reduced fighting skills.
Fighters are certainly not on par with monks outside of combat. Fewer class skills, fewer skill ranks, slower move, encumbered by armor, worse attributes (= less skill bonuses). No, I don't buy that.
And I don't buy that monks are outclassed by everyone in combat. Our cleric is worse but then he has other abilities where he shines and that's as it should be.
Rangers are a total blowout. They get at least two more skills/level than the monk [...]
Rangers are certainly a good choice for out of combat tasks but I tried to stick to comparing the monk with the fighter in this thread (or at least at the beginning of it).
I don't like it when comparisons go like this:
A: fighter does much more damage than monk, so monk has problems
B: well, monk is better than fighter out of combat
A: but ranger is better than monk out of combat, so monk has problems
Comparing the monk to the ranger, paladin, barbarian, rogue is certainly interesting of its own but a completely different topic.
Liam ap Thalwig; man you said a lot of stuff. So let’s go over that.
Dotted for later comment (no time now), although I do have to remark that you are comparing the monk to a bunch of other classes at once which is not fair IMHO. Let's stick to comparing it with one class I say.
Dotted for later comment (no time now), although I do have to remark that you are comparing the monk to a bunch of other classes at once which is not fair IMHO. Let's stick to comparing it with one class I say.Liam ap Thalwig; man you said a lot of stuff. So let’s go over that.
If you notice, I wasn't comparing the abilities in my post, I was simply highlighting that other classes get them. With one exception: I was comparing the paucity of ki pool to a Bardic Performance or Barbarian Rage. Only to highlight that the developers did not seem to like the monk overally much.
Master Arminas
Rangers are a total blowout. They get at least two more skills/level than the monk [...]Rangers are certainly a good choice for out of combat tasks but I tried to stick to comparing the monk with the fighter in this thread (or at least at the beginning of it).
I don't like it when comparisons go like this:
A: fighter does much more damage than monk, so monk has problems
B: well, monk is better than fighter out of combat
A: but ranger is better than monk out of combat, so monk has problemsComparing the monk to the ranger, paladin, barbarian, rogue is certainly interesting of its own but a completely different topic.
I agree that that's a bit off, and was worried about bringing it up in the first place because of that. I was mostly - in my original post - responding to the notion that people bring up sometimes that the monk somehow makes up for being clearly inferior in combat by being some kind of out-of-combat superstar, when it's rock-bottom tier, only clearly ahead of the fighter. If you're going to be dramatically inferior in one regard, you should be dramatically superior to compensate somewhere else, if that somewhere else is supposed to be your compensation. The monk isn't dramatically superior out of combat. It's one of the worst and most useless classes out of combat, even if it's better than the fighter.
Don't foget that most of the "greater" maneuver feats only have a prereq. of the "improved" version letting monk skip combat expertise. It's a hidden bonus to the monk bonus feats.
Don't foget that most of the "greater" maneuver feats only have a prereq. of the "improved" version letting monk skip combat expertise. It's a hidden bonus to the monk bonus feats.
You might want to check your rulebook. Unless something dramatically changed in the 5th printing, the "Greater" combat maneuver feats have "Improved, Combat Expertise, INT 13, BaB +6" as prerequisites. Or the Power Attack version of that. The chart is abbreviated (presumably for space), but the individual feats list these requirements.
I don't think your comparison really proved that the monk is better out of combat. Nearly all of the monk's class features are combat related, but don't add much value.
When you look at the non combat class features, you have slow fall, high jump, timeless body, tongue of the sun and moon, and empty body. Couple these with 2 more skill points per level than the fighter and that's what separates them out of combat. Two of these features aren't available until level 17, one until 19. One can be replicated with a ring of feather falling for a very low price. The other adds a maximum of 10 feet to your jump height or 40 feet to your long jump, but you have to spend a point of ki for that.
With that said, I just don't see how this is enough to make a monk appreciably better than a fighter out of combat.
I don't think your comparison really proved that the monk is better out of combat. Nearly all of the monk's class features are combat related, but don't add much value.
When you look at the non combat class features, you have slow fall, high jump, timeless body, tongue of the sun and moon, and empty body. Couple these with 2 more skill points per level than the fighter and that's what separates them out of combat. Two of these features aren't available until level 17, one until 19. One can be replicated with a ring of feather falling for a very low price. The other adds a maximum of 10 feet to your jump height or 40 feet to your long jump, but you have to spend a point of ki for that.
With that said, I just don't see how this is enough to make a monk appreciably better than a fighter out of combat.
The monk not only gets 2 more skill points per level than the fighter, he also has the better selection of class skills IMHO: Acrobatics, knowledge history and knowledge religion, perception, sense motive, stealth, only loosing out on survival. That's easily +15 skill points he has got more than the fighter. The fighter would need to have almost 8 levels to get 15 skill points.
Slow fall might be easily replicated with a ring of feather falling (which is even better than slow fall) but then it (a) costs money the monk would get another magic item for, (b) takes up one of two precious ring slots and (c) can be lost.
High jump (and enhanced move) at level 12 add +11 feet to jump height at level 12 (jump height: high jump +3 feet, move +5 feet, ki +3 feet) at level 20 it is +15 feet. And let's not forget that the monk can jump like this out of a standing position due to High jump. There are certainly feats that let you do less.
Agreed, tongue of the sun and moon and empty body come late, so they are not really important.
You forgot Abundant step, though, which I think is one of the best features the monk has even if played as RAW where it ends your move. This is a feature which is tremendously useful in and out of combat that makes you able to reach places you couldn't reach otherwise.
Whoa, there, Liam!
The monk not only gets 2 more skill points per level than the fighter, he also has the better selection of class skills IMHO: Acrobatics, knowledge history and knowledge religion, perception, sense motive, stealth, only loosing out on survival. That's easily +15 skill points he has got more than the fighter. The fighter would need to have almost 8 levels to get 15 skill points.
Surely you exaggerate here a bit, my friend. Yes, the monk has more CLASS SKILLS than the fighter, and two (2) more skill points. But the fighter in turn has Handle Animal, Knowledge (engineering), Knowledge (dungeoneering), and Survival, for 10 class skills compared to the monk's 14 class skills.
Unless you are a bard, just putting 1 skill point in a skill to unlock the class skill bonus is a really dumb idea. At best, you might alternate between putting points in Swim and Climb, since those DCs cap out pretty quickly. So, practically speaking, a Monk will have--at most--two more skills than the Fighter, which will probably be a combination of Acrobatics, Perception, or Stealth.
Look, man, by the time you get to the level where you can reliably jump 15' straight up in the air, the wizard is already casting fly each and every combat. The ability to jump is cool, but the game doesn't hinge on whether or not the party can jump 15' straight up.
Master Arminas
Master Arminias:
This is wrong:
"Yes, flurry of blows has their BAB figured at class level -2."
They have full BAB flurrying. The -2 is for two-weapon-fighting.
This thread is about comparing the fighter to the monk - let us stick to the topic.
And to be fair you should compare a monk to the twf-fighter, because that is essentially/technically what a monk does.
In this forum I often get the feeling, a lot of posters think that fights are easily put in a certain form, like: offense is always better than defense, combat 'usually' lasts only three rounds, (and because of that) action economy is the most important thing, etc.
My gaming experience just teaches me otherwise.
@Liam: one other thing for your comparison: a monk can switch out an attack for any combat maneuver, even if that combat maneuver normally needs a standard action (something along those lines, if I remember correctly).
For all intents and purposes, Turgan, a monk's BAB when he uses a flurry of blows is class level -2. As shown on the monk table in the CRB. Since a monk only gains full BAB when flurrying, and he tacks on a -2 to hit because of how it resembles TWF, then his 'virtual' BAB NEVER actually equals his level.
And the monk cannot switch out an attack for any combat maneuver: he can substitute a Disarm, a Sunder, or a Trip in place of any of his attacks in a flurry of blows. No others.
Master Arminas
Don't foget that most of the "greater" maneuver feats only have a prereq. of the "improved" version letting monk skip combat expertise. It's a hidden bonus to the monk bonus feats.You might want to check your rulebook. Unless something dramatically changed in the 5th printing, the "Greater" combat maneuver feats have "Improved, Combat Expertise, INT 13, BaB +6" as prerequisites. Or the Power Attack version of that. The chart is abbreviated (presumably for space), but the individual feats list these requirements.
Wow that's weird seems silly to exclude the prereq's in the table I think it's a lot better that way to let monks grab the feats but whatever my mistake.
Master Arminas, now I think I can squeeze in some time to respond :-)
Hit points:
The 1 hp difference per level is no big deal. This is unchanged by SAD or MAD issues.
Like you said, both will probably put their favored bonus into skill points (or ki points).
Attributes/SAD/MAD:
your fighter 15-point buy: Str 17, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 8
monk 15-point buy: Str 15 (+2 racial, 3 points), Dex 14 (5 points), Con 12 (2 points), Int 12 (2 points), Wis 14 (5 points), Cha 8 (-2 points)
So, the fighter has +1/+1 to hit/dmg, +1 hp/level in addition to the +1 from his hit die, -1 skill points per level in addition to being behind 2 skill points per level and has -2 on will saves compared to the monk.
MAD the monk may be but he gains something from each attribute, so the bonuses are just distributed differently: he is good at many things while the fighter is better in one or two things (dmg dealt and hp).
Skills:
One thing is often overlooked: the monk not only has +2 skill points per level but he has about 15 points more for having a better class skill selection: Acrobatics, knowledge history and knowledge religion, perception, sense motive, stealth, only loosing out on survival (i.e. 6 vs. 1 for a net of 5 class skills each giving +3). Using his favored bonus for skill point sand having better Int due to MAD (hey, MAD can work for the monk, too) he can max out 6 skills or distribute some of the points more evenly.
BAB:
Yes, BAB doesn't apply to standard actions, charges, attacks of opportunity but you can use combat maneuvers for these. Tripping the enemy will (a) make him easier to be hit and (b) might save you from multiple attacks next round when he has to spend a move action to get up instead of multi attacking you.
Agreed, combat maneuvers will not work for many monsters but so what? It's ok if there are situations where I'm not at my best and have to think of other solutions. There will be plenty occasions where combat maneuvers will work nicely. At least a friend of mine was fond of saying that humans make the best monsters. And right he was :-)
Feats:
I did mention that the monk is restricted in his choice of feats but I think that players inclined to play a monk will be quite happy with that list as it contains many feats they are likely to have taken anyway. At least I am having no difficulties to select nice bonus feats.
Yes, the fighter has access to the damaging feats but there are a lot more interesting feats than only those. And I do think that (most of) the feats are comparable in power or at least try to be. So even if you don't get the fighter-only feats you get other useful ones and that is why I did compare the feat counts.
Bravery:
A bonus for saves against fear only? Well, due to better saves the monk has a better save against fear as the fighter at all levels (typically +1). That does not even count the Wis bonus (MAD working for the monk here again) or Still mind which you belittled (don't know why - a bonus of +2 against enchantment is very nice, as that school contains lots of very dangerous spells).
Armor training:
Excellent? I beg to differ. Ok, for someone dependent on armor it surely is useful. But still, even with armor training full plate will have -2 check penalty. If using a heavy shield another -2. So at level 7 the fighter is as fast as the monk was at level 1? The same monk now is 20 feet faster.
And armor must be worn to be effective. Does the fighter sleep in his armor? Probably not. Donning it takes time. 4 minutes even with help for those shiny plate armors. The fight will be long over before that.
And it does not protect against touch attacks. No protection against a specter, for example...
Agreed, if worn and against normal attacks armor and shields are nice protection. But I happen to not like them for their drawbacks, That's probably why I love playing monks :-)
Weapon Training:
No discussion, that's really powerful. That's why I did equal it to 6 feats. Would you rate it higher? And I did equal it to feats to make it comparable.
Armor Mastery:
Very nice feature, but late in the game (level 19).
> Have you ever seen a fighter actually NOT wear armor or use a shield?
Oh yes, when sleeping. Being attacked in the night is not that uncommon I would think.
AC Bonus:
Yes, armor is cheaper, no disagreement here.
Evasion:
Powerful feature. So, rogues and rangers get it, too? So, what? Fighters don't and currently I'm comparing the monk to the fighter. So evasion counts against those extra feats and weapon training.
Improved evasion:
Yeah, rangers get it, too, but very late (level 16). And fighter's don't get it ever.
Fast movement:
So the 3rd level monk is as fast as the 1st level barbarian. That's not the point. The point is that the monk is after than the fighter (and probably twice as fast due to the fighter shiny new plate armor). And btw the monk gets faster and faster. The barbarian not.
Still mind:
Don't know why you are belittling it. Enchantment is powerful. Having a confused fighter is bad news for his chummies. Really bad news. And it's so easy to enchant fighters: bad will save, no bonus, no Wis bonus due to SAD.
Slow fall:
Yes, feather fall is better and the progression is slow. But then you don't always fall from cliffs but you might fall into pits. And most important: fighters can't feather fall. Or they have to buy a ring, giving up a ring slot. And the monk is free to buy another ring instead.
Ki pool:
Enables awesome things, right. And it is small, agreed. Bards and barbarians can do more, agreed. But fighters can't and that's the point of the comparison.
High jump:
More bonuses don't hurt and it enables you to jump without a running start which is quite powerful.
Purity of body:
Situational, but nice, indeed. I do value this much, especially as my monk currently suffers from mummy rot which hit him one level too early :-(
Wholeness of Body:
Actually I think this is not a combat feature. For that it costs too much and heals to few hp.
But assume your character being separated from your cleric on enemy territory and badly wounded. The monk can simply lie low one or two days and heal himself. The fighter will heal much more slowly...
Diamond body:
Immunity to poisons. Awesome feat. So the druid gets it too (and even earlier)? I don't care. Important is that my monk gets it and the fighter doesn't.
Abundant step:
Even if played RAW so that it ends your turn it still lets you reach places where the fighter can only dream of getting to. Very useful ability!
Quivering palm:
1/day is a bummer, agreed. But still, one failed save kills. You probably don't try this on fighter types - but on a wizard? Might work. So, clerics etc. can do better? Of course they can. But the fighter can't.
Timeless body:
I didn't mention that on purpose for the reasons you listed.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon:
So, Bards could do this all the time? Well, fighters still can't.
Empty Body:
Ok, 19th level is quite high. But compared to Armor Mastery (DR 5/-) I would actually prefer Empty Body. Much more useful.
Perfect Self:
I have to confess that I do not know which spells now would not work anymore on the monk? Could you explain, please?
Now that was an even longer posting that my first one but your was long, too :-)
@Liam: one other thing for your comparison: a monk can switch out an attack for any combat maneuver, even if that combat maneuver normally needs a standard action (something along those lines, if I remember correctly).
Yes, he can trip, disarm and sunder, like Master Arminas wrote, but it isn't monk specific, is it?
Enlarge person and reduce person, for starters. Charm person, daze, hold person, mass hold person, and dominate person are baneful effects that you are now immune to. Chaos hammer (cleric 4) now does 10d6 damage to you instead of 5d6, and slows you if you fail a Will save. On the other hand, a lawful outsider bane weapon now affects you.
Master Arminas
@Liam: one other thing for your comparison: a monk can switch out an attack for any combat maneuver, even if that combat maneuver normally needs a standard action (something along those lines, if I remember correctly).Yes, he can trip, disarm and sunder, like Master Arminas wrote, but it isn't monk specific, is it?
Perhaps he is mixing it up with Maneuver Master? Flurry of Maneuvers lets you mix in Bull Rushes or other standard action maneuvers. I don't think the base monk gets this, though.
I know I'm late on this but I find comparing fighters and monks to be disingenuous.
Fighters are the undisputed masters of combat. Period. You can build another class to do it, any class really, but it's what fighters were designed for.
Monks are a hybrid class. They have combat utility but fail in the Tank/Meatshield role and will never compare to their peers in the primary damage dealer role. Unfortunately the majority of players want monks to be comparable to the full BAB classes. Those players, with experience, tend to end up disappointed.
That said I'll give it a whack.
Out of combat utility. (OOCU)
Advantage Monk.
This is NOT a win. Fighters get very little OOCU, basically Intimidate and some occasionally useful abilities like handle animal or ride. Fighters are pretty good examples of the "free form RP" school of thought, because they get almost no mechanical support.
The knowledge skills they get are the least likely to come up on AP style preprinted checks.
Monks are not exactly skill monkeys. I agree with the OP that they have a good skill list. It's incomplete however. Diplomacy should have been included ( I think most of the monk players are in agreement here).
But, here is the rub. We are comparing two of the most underskilled classes in the game. The fighter should have gotten 4 points per level at alpha. His lack of spellcasting means he can't compensate for emergency short falls. He needed more "splash skills". Now he can actually splash his points, since several of his skills either peg out early (Ride,Climb,Swim) or can be majiked with items.
The fighter Can beat the monk at skill points. Since the maneuver based fighter doesn't get to bypass Combat Expertise and he is a SAD build, a maneuver pursuing fighter will be on par with a monk in the raw point department. That's an outside case, but relevant when comparing the 2 most likely classes to develop Trip/Disarm as core combat behaviors.
Monks got shafted on skills as well. While they have a very good list, it is missing some things. The MAD issue means that points are super tight. So unlike the fighter, getting a positive mod in Int. is a bad trade off somewhere else. Comparatively monks are the weakest skill class in the 3/4 BAB group. (Clerics get massive spell compensators). Worse yet, with only 4 points per level, the monk cannot afford to dump his Int. since the monk actually uses his skills (alot).
Still Mind: A +2 bonus against enchantment spells and effects. Wow. I am so stunned by the awesome nature of this ability that . . . I am speechless.
....becouse iron will is not one of the most adviced and preferred feat out of the book, isn't it? That's basically the same, 1 free feat.
Enlarge person and reduce person, for starters. Charm person, daze, hold person, mass hold person, and dominate person are baneful effects that you are now immune to. Chaos hammer (cleric 4) now does 10d6 damage to you instead of 5d6, and slows you if you fail a Will save. On the other hand, a lawful outsider bane weapon now affects you.
I'm going with the fact that anyone will gladly do the trade. A lawful outsider bane may be you'r bane, but the far more common Humanoid(human) bane is not anymore, so that's actualy a plus. Charm person, daze, hold person, mass hold person, and dominate person is the list of half the most feared enchantment effects on D&D you are now immune. Enlarge person and reduce person are a very small loss since there are actually few istance in witch you where going to use those at level 19. And i think at level 19 if any opponents start using Chaos Hammer instead of whatever the crap they can, you can be happy enaugh to not care in the slightest for the extra 10 damage on your auto-succeed save.
Iron will works for in more situations. So, half feat.Still Mind: A +2 bonus against enchantment spells and effects. Wow. I am so stunned by the awesome nature of this ability that . . . I am speechless.....becouse iron will is not one of the most adviced and preferred feat out of the book, isn't it? That's basically the same, 1 free feat.
Tru, but i'll have to go with the fact that Still Mind works in more than half the situation, and sure as hell in the one where it matter the most. So it's quite more than just half.
In Combat Utillity.
Advantage Fighter, by a massive Battleship Deck gun range.
I'd say the feats are about on par. Despite the predetermined nature of the monks choices, his choices are numerous and kind of broad in scope.
What sucks are the number of feats that seem to be monk feats, with virtually no compatibility with the way that monks are actually PLAYED. This is a long list.
Fighters are the king of feats, nuff said. Hugely swappable options mean that the parity between classes makes the feat balance disappear.
AC abilities.
Advantage Fighter.
If you compare the 2 classes without magic items, in a vacuum, the fighter wins. While adding two ability modifiers to AC is nice, it never gets close to what a suit of mundane armor gets you.
Once you start adding magic in, things get wonky. The Monk can and frequently will win the AC race with magic but it's horribly expensive. Monks get shafted by the magic item rules, and the most egregious place is in the armor slot and the choices and compromises that go with it.
That said one of the reasons I play monks is the retardedly high touch AC I can pull off.
Damage.
Fighter.
This isn't even close. Master Arminas did the math up-thread.
#of attacks.
Fighter.
It wasn't like this but the new Flurry ruling means that fighters win on output now. Assuming a TWF chassis, the fighter hits better and does more damage. That's always been the case but the new ruling moved the monk to the back of the pack for TWF builds.
Accuracy
Fighter ( see damage )
What makes this really unbalanced comparison wise is the standard action. Monks cannot even begin to compete on the Move/Attack routine.
Mobility
Monk (barely)
Monk wins on general mobility. He moves around better than any other class. He out jumps and tumbles his competitors. Unfortunately the Fighter can keep up temporarily with the availability of Expeditious Retreat at least on raw speed. He can buy Boots of Striding and Springing ( no brainer purchase ) to be the second fastest guy in the party.
This is another case of magic items cheating the monk out of his role.
Saves
Monk
Seriously, this is why we play monks.
General Toughness
Monk
The monk wins out here. While the HP disparity is greater in my mind than other's seem to find, it's hardly game changing. The meat is in the SA. Most of the anti-poison/disease/aging stuff is window dressing. Most DMs never use the Ghost's aging attack but it's nice to know that to kill me you have to deplete my HP because SOD or SOS abilities are potentially wasted actions on monks. It's meta gaming at it's worst but everyone does it.
The other stuff
Doesn't matter who wins.
The rest of the mash is irrelevant. None of it comes into play until much later in the game so it doesn't count. Balance and comparison is unnecessary after clvl 12 as no one plays without some rule modification here and there and those that don't live in games where full casters are punching giant holes in game plotting.
Now who thinks I'm nutz?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Master Arminas dislikes Still Mind because it's not necessary most of the time.
The Monk is a Wisdom focused class with the best Will Save progression. Iron Will is a great feat, for classes that get burned by Will Saves. It's still solid for everyone else but the Monk and Pally are the 2 classes that will almost never choose it.
It's not worth half a feat for the monk. It's a quarter feat.
A good class to compare monk to is the inquisitor. they are both 1-20 3/4 BAB and same hitdice, but the inquisitor has 6+int skills, and abilities that blow the monk out of the water both in and out of combat. they get a free bonus to one or two(depending on level)of AC/hit/dmg/resists/DR/fast healing/DR bypass that they can use for the whole combat with the only limitation being combats per day your party has. they get bane on their weapon, bonuses on multiple skills, SLAs, and are divine spellcasters with 1 domain power to boot.
This is how a monk should be, a jack of all trades class that is ok at everything they do, and if they want can be focused to become REALLY good at something they want to do.
I think the Inquisitor is a better comparison.
Unfortunately, on pure mechanics, the Inq. just blows the monk out of the water on a relative power comparison.
The Inquisitor starts with a Long Bow.
I call BS right there. The monk is hosed at range in comparison.
The Inq gets a huge spell list.
No spells for monk
The Inq gets 6 skills per level and a nice class list
That's enough to dump stat Int.
Free teamwork feats? With no partner required.
Uh, that's better than a no prereqed Combat Maneuver anyday.
Armor+spells that buff defense.
Better than the Ki AC boost +WIS +Dex. Usually.
Penalties to opponent. In the Bane feature. Likely better than a Monk's Stunning Fist.
I really like Stun Fist, I've long since established my preference for anti-powergaming and suboptimal mechanics.
I know the Inq is better mechanically, I just don't like it flavor-wise.
There must be something seriously wrong with me.
That's actually valid.
Probably more so than as the "root out the heretics" style that the class is designed as.
Does Irori even recognize heretics?
For that matter most of the Golarion faiths would be awkward for the Inquisitor class. Shelyn, Cayden, Desna even Gorum seems like an odd fit.
I'll end thread jack now.
I agree that Inquisitors are great. I posted an archetype of the Inquisitor (The Monastic Inquisitor) that blends the best of the Inquisitor class with a Monk. Let me know what you fellows think!
Master Arminas
The real issue with these types of comparisons are the differences in play styles. If you have a very tactical GM who uses a battle mat/map and minis and counts every move, the Monk's mobility really starts to shine (and gets downright scary if you start looking at the Dimensional Agility feat line). If your GM just sort of hand waves the movement on the "board" it takes away a lot of the Monk's strong points.
The GM is a huge determining factor. Do you have a lot of random encounters when camping? Does the GM allow a fighter to sleep in armor without penalty? Most of the GM's I've played with do. They don't want to hamper the fighter that much, but when you do you minimize the Monk (and the Ranger with their endurance feat). I've seen a lot of GM's hand wave rules to make things easier on players, which goes a long way to making people think the small benefits are useless.
Bravery: Good ability, and the fighter gets a bonus that caps out at +5 on saves versus fear.
Still Mind: A +2 bonus against enchantment spells and effects. Wow. I am so stunned by the awesome nature of this ability that . . . I am speechless.
I find these two statements say quite a bit about your objectivity. The all but useless Bravery is a "good ability" but getting a bonus to the scariest spells a fighter can encounter is laughable?
The real issue with these types of comparisons are the differences in play styles. If you have a very tactical GM who uses a battle mat/map and minis and counts every move, the Monk's mobility really starts to shine (and gets downright scary if you start looking at the Dimensional Agility feat line). If your GM just sort of hand waves the movement on the "board" it takes away a lot of the Monk's strong points.
The GM is a huge determining factor. Do you have a lot of random encounters when camping? Does the GM allow a fighter to sleep in armor without penalty? Most of the GM's I've played with do. They don't want to hamper the fighter that much, but when you do you minimize the Monk (and the Ranger with their endurance feat). I've seen a lot of GM's hand wave rules to make things easier on players, which goes a long way to making people think the small benefits are useless.
I find these two statements say quite a bit about your objectivity. The all but useless Bravery is a "good ability" but getting a bonus to the scariest spells a fighter can encounter is laughable?Bravery: Good ability, and the fighter gets a bonus that caps out at +5 on saves versus fear.
Still Mind: A +2 bonus against enchantment spells and effects. Wow. I am so stunned by the awesome nature of this ability that . . . I am speechless.
The difference is that the Monk has good Will saves and requires a high Wisdom score--bumping his Will save already into the stratosphere. An extra +2 bonus represents very little for the Monk, especially when it is a fixed bonus that does not scale and affects only a sub-set of the entire Will save spectrum. It is really less powerful than the feat Iron Will, although it does stack with that feat.
The Fighter, on the other hand, has a Poor Will save and Wisdom is, generally speaking, considered a dump stat. While I, on a personal level, would not assign anything less than a 10 to Wisdom, many guides and a majority of the builds I have seen on these board recommend an 8 or even 7 Wisdom for the Fighter. In those cases, he needs all the help that he can get. And Bravery scales up to a +5, virtually transforming that Poor Will save to almost Good versus fear effects (which are capable of shutting down the fighter completely).
At 10th level, a Monk will generally have either an 18 or so in Wisdom, and a base Will save of +7, for a total bonus of +11. +13 versus enchantment--and this is before he gets an enhancement bonus to Wisdom or a resistance bonus to saves, which might boost him by another +3 (on average). So at that level, a monk is looking at 1d20+14 with DCs in the 17-21 range. That +2 from still mind brings his total bonus to +16--which means he generally fails only on VERY low roll against most CR appropriate critters.
At the same level, a Fighter might have a Wisdom of 10 (or lower) and his base Will save is +3. He is unlikely to have a Wisdom stat booster, but will probably have a +3 resistance bonus and Iron Will . . . and bravery provides another +3 vs. fear. For a total of +11 vs. fear. Against those DCs of 17-21. Still not that great, but far better than +8. If his Wisdom is a 10. It might go down by 2 more points if he really dumped his Wisdom starting out.
In short, a similar ability does not affect all classes equally. What is good for some IS NOT necessarily as good for others. Fighters need Bravery; Monks do not really need Still Mind.
Master Arminas
In short, a similar ability does not affect all classes equally. What is good for some IS NOT necessarily as good for others. Fighters need Bravery; Monks do not really need Still Mind.
Ah, okay you're comments make a lot more sense now, thank you for clarifying that... although I'm not sure I agree with you. I mean which is worse to you: Giving an army trying to take a hill an extra kid with a BB gun who you hope you won't need, and probably won't be what saves the day, but you never know, it could be. Or installing a vault door on a glass house and hoping the bad guys only go for the door? Personally I think they both have the same amount of usefulness (almost nil).
It is usefull, Jodokai. But, compared to what other classes get, Still Mind is a very small, very weak feature. Paladins get total immunity to fear and grant their allies within 10' a +4 morale bonus on saves at 3rd level. At 8th level, they become immune to charms, and grant their allies within 10' a +4 morale bonus to save. At 17th level, they become immune to compulsions and grant their allies within 10' a +4 morale bonus to save.
Fighters get Bravery, which scales up to a +5 unnamed bonus vs. fear.
Barbarians can select Clear Mind (reroll a failed Will save), Fearless Rage (immune to shaken and frightened), Internal Fortitude (immune to sickened and nauseated), and Superstition (+2 morale bonus vs. spells, SLAs, and supernatural abilities that scales up to +7) as rage powers.
Bards get +1-+4 scaling Inspire Courage, which gives that bonus on attack rolls, damage rolls, and saves vs. charm and fear effects to the bard and all allies that can see or hear the bard (no range limit!), Inspire Greatness (+4 morale bonus on all saves) for himself and/or one ally within 30' (or two allies at 18th level), and gets a blanket +4 unamed bonus on saves made against bardic performance, sonic, or language-dependent effects.
Clerics, Sorcerers, and Wizards get spells. Enough said.
Druids get a +4 unnamed bonus on saves vs. SLAs and supernatural abilities of fey creatures.
Of course, Rangers and Rogues don't get anything like it, but they have other abilities.
Master Arminas