| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
No.
You make your character how you see fit.
Unless the DM thinks your build is broken and asks to to remake it...
Tell the whining little B!tc#3$ that they have the opportunity to take the same feats and progression as you if they like.. if Not shut it!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's nothing wrong with having high AC, but I can see why they might be annoyed if you're so spec'd for not getting hit that you no longer meaningfully contribute, if you understand what I mean. If you're still doing well offensively (or are definitely trying to make yourself a target and succeeding) I don't see any issue.
No. Your build is your build. That is the benefit of the monk class. I have a 3rd level wizard/2nd level monk (martial artist)kitsune. Right now his AC is 24 with what he gets and that does not count when he goes into Snake style.
Sometimes just by being an extra target contributes more to a combat than actually dealing damage.
If you can slow or stop the bad guys before they can get a bead on your mage or support cleric then your actual damage output becomes frosting.
on the other hand, if your tactics include getting the heck out of there to let your party rot then I can see an issue there.
Talk to the other players and explain the benefit you are providing and that it helps out the whole group,long-term, for you not to get hit. Less healing resources, blocking baddies, etc.
Is your character a one trick pony? If all you can do is have a high AC and hitting foes is an issue then maybe you should re-consider your build. Also, do you want to play a character that no one in your group likes? Can you find a balance and are you willing to make concessions?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the GM is playing for keeps then make sure you can survive. If the other players don't like it, too bad. This is not a competition. Tell them to make better characters, and not worry about what you are making since you are not breaking any rules.
PS:If you accidentally broke a rule then I retract parts of my statement. :)
PS2:Playing for keeps refers to campaigns where the GM does not fudge dice to help you, and uses very optimal tactics.
Honestly it seems like you are the tank of the group. If you have antagonize then it is an excellent build.
I have 18 strength. SO I do flurry decently. We rolled for stats because he is old school and I came out with pretty high stats around the board.
Nice. Rolling for stats can really help the monk out by taking away the whole MAD issue.
|
I have 18 strength. SO I do flurry decently. We rolled for stats because he is old school and I came out with pretty high stats around the board.Nice. Rolling for stats can really help the monk out by taking away the whole MAD issue.
The downside of rolling for stats is that if someone rolls badly, they can be easily overshadowed by someone who rolled well.
Rolled stats can make for a very uneven power level in the party. Especially is someone who wants to play a specific class doesn't roll the stats to support that class well.
Nice. And I was meaning Antagonize for later levels. But it is your choice. I was just thinking it would make a already good tank into a something like the Panzer Maus.
A situation fitting of this description:
"it is so big and armored and intimidating that you can't help to want to kill it even though you can fit inside it's main gun. It can make even the most cowardly soldier try and be a hero just to claim he took the behemoth down."
sorry for the history-based tangent/rant.
I play tanker often and have even used a build like this (though I somehow rolled all 16s) and I can tell you. Antagonize is annoying to a GM who doesn't want his Crazed-Mage-Slaying Barbarian focusing on the Monk while a rogue sneak attacks from behind.
Either way best of luck. Just play what you want to play.
I have 18 strength. SO I do flurry decently. We rolled for stats because he is old school and I came out with pretty high stats around the board.Nice. Rolling for stats can really help the monk out by taking away the whole MAD issue.The downside of rolling for stats is that if someone rolls badly, they can be easily overshadowed by someone who rolled well.
Rolled stats can make for a very uneven power level in the party. Especially is someone who wants to play a specific class doesn't roll the stats to support that class well.
Depends on how the GM handles it. I personally let my players roll 4d6-dropping-lowest in 2 sets of 6 and then have them take the higher set. But if you roll straight down the stat list then at some point a player will royally get screwed.
Depends on how the GM handles it. I personally let my players roll 4d6-dropping-lowest in 2 sets of 6 and then have them take the higher set. But if you roll straight down the stat list then at some point a player will royally get screwed.I have 18 strength. SO I do flurry decently. We rolled for stats because he is old school and I came out with pretty high stats around the board.Nice. Rolling for stats can really help the monk out by taking away the whole MAD issue.The downside of rolling for stats is that if someone rolls badly, they can be easily overshadowed by someone who rolled well.
Rolled stats can make for a very uneven power level in the party. Especially is someone who wants to play a specific class doesn't roll the stats to support that class well.
Every GM I've ever played with in any system where you roll stats has some sort of insurance policy for dealing with a player getting royally screwed by dice rolls (I let my players re-roll if they get too badly hammered by the random number god).
I have heard of a few who don't. Though they usually don't like using the rolling method. So they might be biased.
Is that the group's only complaint? Is it the whole group + GM? Or is it a vocal minority?
I've got a 12th lvl monk who rolled impressively as well, and with Belt of Incredible Dexterity plus Amulet of Mighty Fist I end up having the highest AC and pretty respectable combat skills. Although I went the Improved/Greater Grapple route (GM doesn't allow the Styles, like Crane).
Monks are allowed to be fun, are the complainer(s) visitors to these forums and got the wrong impression about the class?
A difference of 8 AC can be pretty rough to deal with as a GM, what does your HP look like compared to the fighter? I assume you are both front line fighters?
As others have mentioned, you might try and figure out how you can be the tank so that others can focus more on damage. This is a discussion to have with the DM and group since PF does not really have a system for managing "aggro."
Wait, they are complaining that their ally never gets hit? Who's side are they on?
I can't see the party fighter complaining - you're helping flank and dish damage.
The cleric can't mind - one less person to heal.
The mage should't mind, you move fast enough to block aggressors coming his way.
I'd be happy to have you in my party - you'd be front line damage output or not.
(As long as the DM isn't buffing the monster to target you - because anything that might hit you WILL nail everyone else).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a pretty impressive AC. I'm building a lvl6 Halfling Aldori Fighter (singleton with Crane Style/Wing and Cautious Fighter/Blundering Defense) right now, and in +1 fullplate, with a full attack fighting defensively, he has 30 AC (and grants adjacent allies a +3 luck bonus to AC/CMD). Next level he gets Steel Net, and Parry scales, so it'll be 33 AC and +4 luck bonus to allies. But your character is only level 5, so there's not much point to considering my lvl7 AC. You've got impressive mobility and saves that my fighter is missing as well.
|
I do remember playing back in 3.5 where the party included a monk who was nearly impossible to hit, had ludicrously good saves and never (that anyone could recall) failed a save, and yet couldn't hit the broad-side of a Fiendish Dire Barn. It got really obnoxious during a fight with a red dragon, when the monk realized it was impossible to hit without critting, and decided that since he couldn't hit anyway, he'd start the looting a little early. Which led to the dragon focusing on him and making things a little easier for the rest of us but it was pretty annoying. As long as you're contributing to the group and not some kind of indestructible leech, I'd have the GM tell the other players to put on their big-boy (or girl) pants and get on with the game.
I'm curious how you get AC 32 at level 5 without having either insanely good stats or shattering the WbL rules.
We know he has an 18 str, so lets assume he has 16 Wis and 16 Dex. That gives you a base AC or 22. Another 2 for Dodge and the Monk bonus for 24. Fighting defensively in Crane Stance is good for 4 making it 28 and then the Wizard casts Mage Armor on you for 4 more totaling 32.
Ok not that hard I guess, but since he is a melee character he probably means he has at least 14 con - this guy does have some crazy good luck with a dice.
|
|
I'm curious how you get AC 32 at level 5 without having either insanely good stats or shattering the WbL rules.
We know he has an 18 str, so lets assume he has 16 Wis and 16 Dex. That gives you a base AC or 22. Another 2 for Dodge and the Monk bonus for 24. Fighting defensively in Crane Stance is good for 4 making it 28 and then the Wizard casts Mage Armor on you for 4 more totaling 32.
Ok not that hard I guess, but since he is a melee character he probably means he has at least 14 con - this guy does have some crazy good luck with a dice.
He noted that his stats were 18str, 17 dex, 16 con, 14 int, 18 wis, 12 cha from rolling earlier in the thread.
So yeah, nice set of rolls.
Enough to make Monk viable :O!
[sidebar]Hey I had a player willing drop her musket master's INT to 10 after rolling a lot of excellent stats. INT and CON are 10 and 12 respectively. Everything else is 17+. She rolled 16s for 2 stats. All to fit her character concept.[/sidebar]
What I'm getting at is you have a character concept in mind. Don't let even common sense keep you from playing that concept... odd advice but still true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have 18 strength. SO I do flurry decently. We rolled for stats because he is old school and I came out with pretty high stats around the board.Nice. Rolling for stats can really help the monk out by taking away the whole MAD issue.The downside of rolling for stats is that if someone rolls badly, they can be easily overshadowed by someone who rolled well.
Rolled stats can make for a very uneven power level in the party. Especially is someone who wants to play a specific class doesn't roll the stats to support that class well.
Right, and I think that's the problem here. The Op has like a 40 point build. So, there's your problem OP, the DM let you get away with a unfair set of rolls. Do the other players have similar rolls?
I have a 5th level monk that I built for defense using the Crane Sytle feats. Well the first 2 since I am not 7th level yet. The campaign we are in is supposed to be difficult and hard to survive so I made sure I had evasion with good saves and a very high ac. Well the party is now complaining because my ac is 32 and the fighter in heavy armor only has a 24. Should I change my build around or should I just play my character the way I want and have fun. The dm has already approved all my feats and everything so he doesn't mind either way.
Meh, so you're not first in line for any defensive magic items. Make sure they know that.
When it comes to discrepancies like this, particularly ones based on build choices, it helps to step back an analyze how this plays out in the game. You say the campaign's a tough one. Is every other character getting savaged while the DM can't lay an NPC's finger on your character? If so, I can see how that would be frustrating. It makes it look like your PC isn't shouldering his share of the damage burden.
Has your devotion to defense weakened you in other capacities? It doesn't sound like it has much if at all. That also leads to intra-group frustration.
Ultimately, it sounds a bit like they're suffering from some jealousy - jealousy that your PC is receiving a benefit that theirs is not. The fact that they chose to pursue other benefits rather than the same ones you did is relatively immaterial. That might even enhance any bitterness. This is something that comes up a lot in games (and has for many years) and it can be hard to deal with. They'll almost never confess that jealousy is involved, though.
Is every other character getting savaged while the DM can't lay an NPC's finger on your character? If so, I can see how that would be frustrating. It makes it look like your PC isn't shouldering his share of the damage burden.
I don't think the second part of that really makes sense. If you're being attacked, it means the enemies are essentially wasting their actions which benefits everyone else, and if they don't hit you it also benefits everyone else because it means there are more heals to go around for everyone else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a pretty simple way to handle high-AC monks: saving throws, flat-footed ACs. AC 32 is pretty much unhittable, but that just means enemies have to be creative.
Fact is, the AC 24 fighter may be easier to hit, but he probably deals much more damage overall and almost certainly has more HP. Fighters will be fighters and monks will be monks. To reference a game I've never actually played, if the Heavy complains that the Scout is faster, the Heavy is missing the point of his class.
@Kobold_Cleaver your reference is so true it is ridiculous.
@Kalantra It seems to me one of these might be what is occurring:
1) Your party is full of newer players who are under the assumptions that a High AC should mean wearing Armor.
2) You are a new player(from their perspective) who they feel shouldn't have the knowledge to build such a character.
3) They feel you have done something against them and are trying to ruin the game for you.
4) They are just upset that you thought of this build before them.
I have a 5th level monk that I built for defense using the Crane Sytle feats. Well the first 2 since I am not 7th level yet. The campaign we are in is supposed to be difficult and hard to survive so I made sure I had evasion with good saves and a very high ac. Well the party is now complaining because my ac is 32 and the fighter in heavy armor only has a 24. Should I change my build around or should I just play my character the way I want and have fun. The dm has already approved all my feats and everything so he doesn't mind either way.
If the GM can ignore because you can't damage an oppont then yes. If you still able to take someone down or succeeding in a tank role: No!
If you ask people on a message board if "Are these guys being jerks", you will almost undoubtedly get people to agree with you. The question I would ask the OP is, are you actually trying to get an answer to this question or are you trying to feel vindicated in your stance?
The way you phrased the question makes me have hope that you are earnestly trying to figure this out and I will assume that you are. It's gratifying to assume the best in people!
Since an effective way to learn is to have somebody disagree with you, I will play the part of devil's advocate.
Should I change my build around or should I just play my character the way I want and have fun.
Maybe.
There is no actual direct answer to this question that works for every group. It depends upon the GM and how he responds to your build and it also depends upon the players and how THEY respond to your build.
This comes back to a very old separation of role-players and their attitudes. I've seen this come up often. A golden question I ask myself all the time: Do I sacrifice X for the sake of the game?
Sometimes "X" is my character's true in-game response. Occasionally I find myself wondering if I should role-play my character the way I intended, despite the fact that it involves killing our new player's character (He's evil and he's the one who killed our favorite town NPC?). If I play my character, he has less fun ("You attacked me!"). If I don't play my character, I actually have less fun ("I guess I accept murderers now." *sighs and wonders if I can find better gaming groups*).
Sometimes "X" is a build option. If a particular build annoys or irritates other players, this question comes up as well. This is your "X".
Oftentimes "X" is the cleanliness of my apartment. >.>
No matter what "X" is, it comes down to the same thing. With this group, with this GM, and with you as a person, how much fun will everybody have at the table? Is one simple thing that you have the power to change going to make everybody at the table enjoy themselves less? Are you willing to sacrifice? Are they?
Despite the very poignant answers you will get on this thread, nobody can actually answer these questions for you. It is up to you and your group to decide who must swallow their pride and make a sacrifice. Can your group get pass jealousy, or can you accept being forced into an unwanted change?
In the real world with real people trying to socialize and enjoy each others company, fairness is occasionally unrealistic. Asking you to change your character to fit their needs is unfair, but it's up to you to decide what that unfairness means in the grand scheme of things.
|
|
Upsetting the other players isn't good for campaign longevity. This is part of the reason that I can't remember the last time I rolled a character instead of using point buy. Since you apparently rolled very well, you really can't claim that the other players have poor builds. And your DM can't allow the party to walk through adventures which means the danger level gets ramped up and the ones who rolled worse or who have weaker builds will die. The question then is whether they leave the game and the campaign folds. My bet is the game folds before Christmas.
Why would people at the table complain?
1) You are upsetting the power of the encounters the GM is giving you. If the GM makes monsters who can hit you, then almost nobody else has a chance. Especially if the GM then uses those monsters not to attack you.
2) The GM is not adjusting the power level of encounters. This means that you seem to cakewalk through things, while they all might die.
These two reasons are actually pretty compelling, but it is forgetting that not only is there a ton of PF that does not involve combat that other members can excel from, but also that they can use you as an unhittable shield in level appropriate encounters, and they can throw you in front of harder ones while they assist from the background (especially a magic user/sneak/ranged attacker). Even the fighter can benefit (using a polearm and standing behind the monk-shield).
Ways to mitigate these problems. Grapple: this will let the fighter beat up on the opponent very satisfyingly. Also, since you are having trouble damaging the opponent (and presumably the fighter does do better and more damage) this is the best way to use your and his strengths.
3) The players are simply jealous of your stat rolls
4) The players are trying to compete with your strengths and are ignoring their own
5) The players actually assume a game where rolling can generate dice should be 'balanced' in every single regard.
These three reasons are solved simply by having a mature conversation with the fellow players. Maybe develop useful team tactics that let everyone shine. Maybe discuss the fact that you cannot change the character, and the animosity is hurting the fun of the game (remember, the game is about having fun and killing things is only one vector for that. Arguing ruins it all immediately.
6) There is not enough call for out of the box thinking, so every problem actually ends in the same rather predictable fight
7) There is not a lot of call for player skill, so character stat rolls are the most important factor
These two issues can be discussed with the GM. If every session does turn into a fight, and the fight is always following the same tack, then players might get restless and are using you as an excuse.
If in game strategic play is only addressed by character stats (like disabling a trap only works if you roll 18, not if you say throw a heavy rock at the trap mechanism from a safe distance), then the disparity in stats does make a huge difference. Again, the GM can set up situations where everyone's character can shine, or situations where success is determined by something besides dice-rolling that gets affected by stats.
If the monk has high AC but low HP he may not actually be that far away from the other front line fighters even with +8AC.
For instance, if a monster hits the monk on a 10+ (11/20)and the fighter on a 2+ (19/20) and the fighter has 1.73X HP (19/11) then they actually have the same survivability (more or less) against that monster. That said, the monk also has 16CON apparently so it is unlikely that the other front line fighter can get high enough for this to balance well.
As others have mentioned, I think your problem is that you rolled too well. This is exactly why I prefer point buy or array for character building. If you really want some randomness I would assign a number to each array and then roll to see which array you use.
Thing is, though, the monk hasn't rolled the best. As stated, the paladin actually rolled better than him.
Everyone else rolled "at least a 22 point buy," the monk's minimum point buy is;
Dwarf
STR 18 (17)
DEX 17 (13)
CON 14+2 (5)
INT 14 (5)
WIS 16+2 (10)
CHA 14-2 (5)
That is a 55 point buy (57 if human), which is nuts.
Even if the Paladin rolled a higher point buy, which may not even be true, it still doesn't mean the 22 point guys aren't at a huge disadvantage. The Paladin rolled "3 base 18's after racial mod's", which is 37-42 points and right up there with the 40 points on STR,DEX,WIS in the example above.
Yep. Ok, no wonder some are upset. It is time to go back to point buy here. Also I have a sneaking felling that either the dice rolling was not witnessed or the system was very generous "Roll 6 d6 drop 2, re-roll ones- do five sets and pick the best..."
Awful cynical, to accuse at least two folk of lying just for inordinately good rolls.
Awful cynical, to accuse at least two folk of lying just for inordinately good rolls.
Like I said ...or the system was very generous "Roll 6 d6 drop 2, re-roll ones- do five sets and pick the best..."
I played in that "Roll 6 d6 drop 2, re-roll ones" and got a really high set. Mind you, so did most everyone else. And I play in another game where we use 4 D6, drop one, but roll three sets and pick the best. That gets pretty good numbers too.
But with straight 3 or 4 D6? One set of rolls?
Dr Deth, that is probability in a nut shell.
Does it happen often, no
Does it happen, yes
Just last year or so the same lottery number won two jackpots.
Luck exists when rolling dice :)
|
Honestly I would try to reason with the other players. If the majority still beleive that you are too powerful then make a new character. If this were an Online game or Pathfinder Society we were talking about I would tell you to just say tough luck. But as these are living breathing friends that you see face to face, keeping everyone happy is far more important. Are you willing to alienate yourself to your friends and risk the game ending prematurely due to dis-interest? If not then you need to find a way to keep everyone happy and that may mean making a new character. I do however concede that the situation you find yourself in is unfair, however so is life. It is just the way the cards fell, and in this instance they did not fall in your favor. Sorry it is not the answer you wanted to hear.
Edit: I am speaking from personal experience. As a power gamer myself I commonly run into this same scenario and have to contend with party jealosy. I have fought the battle before with many groups on many occasions. The game almost always ends a few sessions after the issue is brought up. Depending on your behavior you may shut the door on ever playing with those players again. Beleive me it is better just to concede because with the average gamer menatlity you will not sway them with reason or logic. By the sounds of it they have already convinced themself that your character is the problem and have grouped up against you. Unless you believe you have the ability to sway a mob mentality then the fight is already over. I hope you like your next character as well.
I think it is very likely that the rolling system was more generous than 4d6 drop the lowest. The chance of rolling a 55 point buy using that rolling system is about 0.2%, yes that decimal is in the right place.
FYI: I am valuing rolls less than 7 at -4 points since they are off the chart and this is the best reasonable assumption for getting a high point buy. Rolls of 6 or less only happen about 2.8% of the time anyway.
I think it is very likely that the rolling system was more generous than 4d6 drop the lowest. The chance of rolling a 55 point buy using that rolling system is about 0.2%, yes that decimal is in the right place.
Are you sure? Those odds are way better than I thought. Those are a bit below the odds of rolling two 20s in a row--quite unlikely, but still possible. Or is it three 20s? I don't understand probability. Either way, it's happened.