Assuming you don't mind few attacks with a bonus, get ki straps or whatever they are they add +1 to 1-4 attacks based on bab. This combined with an agile Amulet of MF amulet is cheap.effectively, building a monk to deal damage requires one of 2 things, either not acting like a proper monk, or becoming a glass cannon...or using a dexterity build and an agile property on the AoMF. However, monks are still not great damage dealers. To be honest that doesn't bother me so much as the fact that they have no other options to influence combat - stunning fist is too unreliable, maneuvers too situational (and the core monk isn't great at them anyway).
The monk designs that DO work are largely one-trick ponies; they may be good at that trick (although it's not guaranteed), like the zen-archer or the tetori, but they aren't much cop for anything else. Looking at other classes, few are so restricted - a fighter doesn't have to sacrifice much AC to be a great damage dealer, for example.
Dexterity build falls apart before 7-8ish as a noncontributor due to a lack of ability to get an agile amulet of mighty fists without either, extremely good luck (nearly impossibly good), or DM fiat.
the amulet's biggest weakness in rarity is that it is competing with the wondrous items list.
and agile eats a whole +1 off the amulet. now DR alignment is unbypassable for you.
now you have simply blown 2 feats, and +1 of your amulet's bonuses to compensate for a low strength if you want damage or manuevers.
the agile amulet hinders you in the long run.
especially since its ability cap is halved, and price is doubled.
but the straps don't even affect all of your attacks, and because only a small amount are getting the bonus, it is a worthless item for it's price tag. a magic weapon has no limit on how many attacks it can make with the bonus for far cheaper.
in fact, smart, non-archery focused monks, grab a temple sword and hold it in both hands when flurrying. even if you don't get 1.5 str, you do get 1.5 power attack and cheaper bonuses means better enhancements. plus easier time hitting, means more DPR.
Yep. The iconic unarmed class fights better when armed. In fact, OTHER classes fight better than the monk UNARMED!
in fact, smart, non-archery focused monks, grab a temple sword and hold it in both hands when flurrying. even if you don't get 1.5 str, you do get 1.5 power attack and cheaper bonuses means better enhancements. plus easier time hitting, means more DPR.
Yeah, you have as much hit bonus as a unarmed monk, you lose in base damage (a temple sword does less damage than unarmed) and you don't have hit bonuses high enough to afford power attack (a martial class still has +6 or more bonus to hit over the monk at 20th, not even accounting for feats or the malus for flurry => it means a full-attack with power attack from a fighter have more chance to hit than a normal flurry from a monk).
But yeah, the sword is cheaper, and you can special proprieties up to +10 instead of the +5 the amulet allows.
Yep. The iconic unarmed class fights better when armed. In fact, OTHER classes fight better than the monk UNARMED!
Armed is better than Unarmed. period.
the disadvantage of armed combat, is that your weapon can be disarmed or sundered. which is a frequently ignored drawback in most campaigns i have seen. an even then, a backup weapon, or belt of them is superior to fighting unarmed.
in fact, bonuses with weapons are easier to get than unarmed bonuses.
in fact, smart, non-archery focused monks, grab a temple sword and hold it in both hands when flurrying. even if you don't get 1.5 str, you do get 1.5 power attack and cheaper bonuses means better enhancements. plus easier time hitting, means more DPR.Yeah, you have as much hit bonus as a unarmed monk, you lose in base damage (a temple sword does less damage than unarmed) and you don't have hit bonuses high enough to afford power attack (a martial class still has +6 or more bonus to hit over the monk at 20th, not even accounting for feats or the malus for flurry => it means a full-attack with power attack from a fighter have more chance to hit than a normal flurry from a monk).
But yeah, the sword is cheaper, and you can special proprieties up to +10 instead of the +5 the amulet allows.
The damage a class does is not from base damage. It is from static damage. As an example kukris are only 1d4, but they among the damaging dealers for TWF.
in fact, smart, non-archery focused monks, grab a temple sword and hold it in both hands when flurrying. even if you don't get 1.5 str, you do get 1.5 power attack and cheaper bonuses means better enhancements. plus easier time hitting, means more DPR.Yeah, you have as much hit bonus as a unarmed monk, you lose in base damage (a temple sword does less damage than unarmed) and you don't have hit bonuses high enough to afford power attack (a martial class still has +6 or more bonus to hit over the monk at 20th, not even accounting for feats or the malus for flurry => it means a full-attack with power attack from a fighter have more chance to hit than a normal flurry from a monk).
But yeah, the sword is cheaper, and you can special proprieties up to +10 instead of the +5 the amulet allows.
the enhanced sword is cheaper, allowing better enhancement bonuses, granting better attack bonuses making power attack more affordable.
also, unarmed is inferior until 12th level, where only the base die increases. but by then, a +4 temple sword is cheaper than a +3 amulet. with a decent strength, the fact that flurry mimics full bab, and the fact you only need one melee weapon. you aren't too far behind a 2WF ranger against nonfavored foes.
the temple sword has the monk property, and thus can be flurried with. a monk is also automatically proficient with it.
base damage means nothing compared to static bonuses.
i'd rather have 1d8+20 at +17/17/12/12/7 then 2d6+15 at +16/16/11/11/6
and that is assuming 22 Strength, power attack, weapon focus, 12 level monk flurry +3 amulet against +4 temple sword.
The damage a class does is not from base damage. It is from static damage. As an example kukris are only 1d4, but they among the damaging dealers for TWF.
I totally agree, but what static damage does a monk have ?
His strength ? He has less than any martial (because he needs 3 other abilities, and maybe 4 others if he wants to scout).
His class features ? None does damage.
His magic item ? Any martial class have those.
His power attack ? He can't afford it if he wants to reliably hit things (he have way too little hit bonuses).
A fighter add 10 static damage to all creature if he have his weapon he's focused with, and something like 5 to 10 for his strength (he add 1,5 times his strength, and can afford more strength to begin with), with better to hit. And can add 18 more damage (power attack) with equal to hit comparing to the monk (he has the same hit bonus power attacking as a monk who doesn't).
A barbarian will have insane to hit and damage thanks to his rage, and will be the best with maneuvers thanks to his rage power (he can grapple the tarasque at 15th level). And he will have power attack as its first feat.
A paladin will have smite, that allows him to do insane damage to Evil foes (A lot of what you deal with in APs), ignore ALL RD when hitting.
So, the difference in damage will be decided in the base damage for monks (even if it doesn't mean a lot of things) and multiple attacks (but, hey, even if you CAN attack 8 times a round, if only one or two hits, it means nothing).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I normally try to steer clear of these threads but has anyone taken a look at the Adventuring classes: Monk Reborn by Tripod Machine? It fixes alot of what you are talking about with whats wrong with the monk. and best of all its a cheap fix (literally its 1.99 and follows all the authors took great pains to treat the monk like the class it deserves to be.) Thought i would just throw that out there since the monk has been fixed just not by paizo. Figure its better than sitting here arguing about it.
The damage a class does is not from base damage. It is from static damage. As an example kukris are only 1d4, but they among the damaging dealers for TWF.I totally agree, but what static damage does a monk have ?
His strength ? He has less than any martial (because he needs 3 other abilities, and maybe 4 others if he wants to scout).
His class features ? None does damage.
His magic item ? Any martial class have those.
His power attack ? He can't afford it if he wants to reliably hit things (he have way too little hit bonuses).A fighter add 10 static damage to all creature if he have his weapon he's focused with, and something like 5 to 10 for his strength (he add 1,5 times his strength, and can afford more strength to begin with), with better to hit. And can add 18 more damage (power attack) with equal to hit comparing to the monk (he has the same hit bonus power attacking as a monk who doesn't).
A barbarian will have insane to hit and damage thanks to his rage, and will be the best with maneuvers thanks to his rage power (he can grapple the tarasque at 15th level). And he will have power attack as its first feat.
A paladin will have smite, that allows him to do insane damage to Evil foes (A lot of what you deal with in APs), ignore ALL RD when hitting.
So, the difference in damage will be decided in the base damage for monks (even if it doesn't mean a lot of things) and multiple attacks (but, hey, even if you CAN attack 8 times a round, if only one or two hits, it means nothing).
a onispawn monk can reliably breach 22 strength by 12th level.
Str 22 (15 base +3 levels +2 race +2 belt)
Dex 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Con 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Int 12 (12 base)
Wis 18 (14 base +2 race +2 headband)
Cha 5 (7 base -2 Race)
and so far, other than 52,000 worth of gear spent so far, it is still a 20 point monk. a 25 point allotment could accomodate a 16 base wisdom for a 20.
with power attack and weapon focus
the 12th level monk is doing 5 attacks at +17/17/12/12/7 with a temple sword for 1d8+20 with a 20x3 crit multiplier. CR 12 monster has an average AC of 27. 1st 2 attacks hit an average of 55% of the time.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
if you have to resort to a specific race, it's no longer about the class.
==Aelryinth
if you have to resort to a specific race, it's no longer about the class.
==Aelryinth
an Oread, Human, Half orc, or Half Elf can do it too. if you don't mind the loss of a wisdom bonus. Onispawn are merely the best choice.
to a lesser extent, the Angelkin, Demonspawn, Suli, and Nagaji don't fall too far behind.
all that really matters is the strength bonus.
the Wis bonus with the Cha penalty is merely gravy
Yep. The iconic unarmed class fights better when armed. In fact, OTHER classes fight better than the monk UNARMED!Armed is better than Unarmed. period.
Yes, and the problem in making a class that is (apparently) designed to fight unarmed, then making unarmed a sub-standard option, is you make the class in question sub-standard in combat - which is a silly thing to do to a combat class.
Hence the monk's unarmed option needs some work. Note I am not saying it needs damage - the monk needs a 'thing' in combat, rather than jst more damage. We already have damage-dealers.
the disadvantage of armed combat, is that your weapon can be disarmed or sundered. which is a frequently ignored drawback in most campaigns i have seen. an even then, a backup weapon, or belt of them is superior to fighting unarmed.
in fact, bonuses with weapons are easier to get than unarmed bonuses.
Exactly. If armed combat has disadvantages hardly ever exploited, then there are only disadvantages to fighting unarmed.
The damage a class does is not from base damage. It is from static damage. As an example kukris are only 1d4, but they among the damaging dealers for TWF.I totally agree, but what static damage does a monk have ?
His strength ? He has less than any martial (because he needs 3 other abilities, and maybe 4 others if he wants to scout).
His class features ? None does damage.
His magic item ? Any martial class have those.
His power attack ? He can't afford it if he wants to reliably hit things (he have way too little hit bonuses).A fighter add 10 static damage to all creature if he have his weapon he's focused with, and something like 5 to 10 for his strength (he add 1,5 times his strength, and can afford more strength to begin with), with better to hit. And can add 18 more damage (power attack) with equal to hit comparing to the monk (he has the same hit bonus power attacking as a monk who doesn't).
A barbarian will have insane to hit and damage thanks to his rage, and will be the best with maneuvers thanks to his rage power (he can grapple the tarasque at 15th level). And he will have power attack as its first feat.
A paladin will have smite, that allows him to do insane damage to Evil foes (A lot of what you deal with in APs), ignore ALL RD when hitting.
So, the difference in damage will be decided in the base damage for monks (even if it doesn't mean a lot of things) and multiple attacks (but, hey, even if you CAN attack 8 times a round, if only one or two hits, it means nothing).
The temple sword will outdamage the fist, mostly due to power attack.
At level assuming the game makes it that far2d10 averages out to 11
1d8 averages out to 4.5
power attack would be a -6 to hit but it is still a +18
That means the total is 22.5
A CR 20 monster has an average AC of 36
A monk can easily have a +37 to hit before power attack and TWF penalties come into play so even after counting in power attack the monk still has to roll less than a 10 to hit for the first two hits.
After that the bonus to damage and crit range make up for it.
The monk will do more damage with the temple sword.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. The iconic unarmed class fights better when armed. In fact, OTHER classes fight better than the monk UNARMED!Armed is better than Unarmed. period.
the disadvantage of armed combat, is that your weapon can be disarmed or sundered. which is a frequently ignored drawback in most campaigns i have seen. an even then, a backup weapon, or belt of them is superior to fighting unarmed.
in fact, bonuses with weapons are easier to get than unarmed bonuses.
IMO, this shouldn't be the case. No fighting style should be inherently better than another one just because.
The most effective fighting style should be the one you devote more resources to. A character shouldn't be gimped because it's unrealistic for unarmed strike to be better than swordsmanship.
This is a fantasy game, where characters should be awesome at what the player want them to be awesome. And they do all sorts of unrealistic stuff all the time!
The advantage of unarmed strikes not being vulnerable to sunder/steal/disarm is balanced by the fact that you fight things like acidic/venomous oozes, energy-draining undead, fire/lava elementals, barbed demons and many other things you don't want to touch!
Now, add the fact that you only have a single way to enhance your attacks, and it's in a very specific, very expensive item that can be lost/stolen/sundered, uses a item slot and is relatively rare compared to magic weapons...
Now unarmed is completely outclassed by all other weapons in the game.
Yep. The iconic unarmed class fights better when armed. In fact, OTHER classes fight better than the monk UNARMED!Armed is better than Unarmed. period.
the disadvantage of armed combat, is that your weapon can be disarmed or sundered. which is a frequently ignored drawback in most campaigns i have seen. an even then, a backup weapon, or belt of them is superior to fighting unarmed.
in fact, bonuses with weapons are easier to get than unarmed bonuses.
IMO, this shouldn't be the case. No fighting style should be inherently better than another one just because.
The most effective fighting style should be the one you devote more resources to. A character shouldn't be gimped because it's unrealistic for unarmed strike to be better than swordsmanship.
This is a fantasy game, where characters should be awesome at what the player want them to be awesome. And they do all sorts of unrealistic stuff all the time!
The advantage of unarmed strikes not being vulnerable to sunder/steal/disarm is balanced by the fact that you fight things like acidic/venomous oozes, energy-draining undead, fire/lava elementals, barbed demons and many other things you don't want to touch!
Now, add the fact that you only have a single way to enhance your attacks, and it's in a very specific, very expensive item that can be lost/stolen/sundered, uses a item slot and is relatively rare compared to magic weapons...Now unarmed is completely outclassed by all other weapons in the game.
and because of that, smart monks focus on the temple sword instead. even in most JRPGs and TBSGs
monks may have been useful in the beginning, but eventually grew outclassed by weapon users when weapon attack bonuses outpaced level based unarmed bonuses, exceeded the unarmed damage cap, had better crit chances, and could reach the cap earlier if you could save up enough funds, which was never a problem in most JRPGs and TBSGs
Disgaea was smart enough to give their monks (called brawlers) the ability to use gauntlets as weapons. you typically wanted a brawler or 2 for reposition manuevers to set up your swordsman for a hurricane slash or helm splitter on the early maps.
if you ever design a class around punching or kicking things in a JRPG or TBSG. remember to give them a weapon to augment their damage with. even if it is just a gauntlet, armored boot, or whatever.
a onispawn monk can reliably breach 22 strength by 12th level.
Str 22 (15 base +3 levels +2 race +2 belt)
Dex 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Con 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Int 12 (12 base)
Wis 18 (14 base +2 race +2 headband)
Cha 5 (7 base -2 Race)and so far, other than 52,000 worth of gear spent so far, it is still a 20 point monk.
And with the base magic items (ring +3, amulet +3, bracers of armor +3 ?), you will have maybe 28 AC.
A fighter will have his +5 full plate by then, and with the same 20 points to buy his attributes, he will have more in strength (1 to 3 more), more in AC (33 is low for a fighter this level), more to hit (+11 to hit more than the monk), more in damage (something like 10 to 15 more damage per attack), and still have feats to be good at several skills or several maneuvers or several saves if he wants to. And remember, the fighter is known to be the least versatile of all classes (tied with the rogue).
At level assuming the game makes it that far
2d10 averages out to 11
1d8 averages out to 4.5power attack would be a -6 to hit but it is still a +18
That means the total is 22.5
The fist is 2d10 out to 11, and with power attack, it means +12, which goes to 23. Fists are actually better (by 0,5) in average, and way better with maximum damage. the difference is in critical.
A monk can easily have a +37 to hit before power attack and TWF penalties come into play so even after counting in power attack the monk still has to roll less than a 10 to hit for the first two hits.
How do you do that ? I mean, you have 20 from BAB, maybe +8 from strength, and +5 from your weapon. You still have +5 to find.
Only 18 from BaB, regardless of what she says about "Before TWFing penalties" you've either got +18 or +15 at 20th, since your only options are "Single attack (at +15)", "regular full attack (at +15)", and Flurry (at +18).
a onispawn monk can reliably breach 22 strength by 12th level.
Str 22 (15 base +3 levels +2 race +2 belt)
Dex 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Con 16 (14 base +2 belt)
Int 12 (12 base)
Wis 18 (14 base +2 race +2 headband)
Cha 5 (7 base -2 Race)and so far, other than 52,000 worth of gear spent so far, it is still a 20 point monk.
And with the base magic items (ring +3, amulet +3, bracers of armor +3 ?), you will have maybe 28 AC.
A fighter will have his +5 full plate by then, and with the same 20 points to buy his attributes, he will have more in strength (1 to 3 more), more in AC (33 is low for a fighter this level), more to hit (+11 to hit more than the monk), more in damage (something like 10 to 15 more damage per attack), and still have feats to be good at several skills or several maneuvers or several saves if he wants to. And remember, the fighter is known to be the least versatile of all classes (tied with the rogue).
At level assuming the game makes it that far
2d10 averages out to 11
1d8 averages out to 4.5power attack would be a -6 to hit but it is still a +18
That means the total is 22.5
The fist is 2d10 out to 11, and with power attack, it means +12, which goes to 23. Fists are actually better (by 0,5) in average, and way better with maximum damage. the difference is in critical.
A monk can easily have a +37 to hit before power attack and TWF penalties come into play so even after counting in power attack the monk still has to roll less than a 10 to hit for the first two hits.How do you do that ? I mean, you have 20 from BAB, maybe +8 from strength, and +5 from your weapon. You still have +5 to find.
i was only pointing out a 12th level monk
there is no way to get 2d10 unarmed at 12th level.
not only does the +3 amulet cost 4,000 more than the +4 sword
but upgrading unarmed from 2d6 to 2d8 at 12th level requires a 13,000 gold item on top of that. 17K extra.
enough difference between a +3 and +4 bracers alongside a +3 cloak, with 1,000 extra thrown in.
lets see what i can get for 108K
Belt of physical perfection +2 (16K)
Headband of Wis +2 (4K)
+4 Temple Sword (32.3K)
+4 Bracers of Armor (16K)
Eyes of the Eagle (2.5K)
Cloak of resistance +3 (9K)
Ring of Protection +3 (18K)
Amulet of natural armor +3 (18K)
104.8K spent
Before Feats
AC 30 (+3 Dex +4 Wis +3 monk +4 armor +3 natural +3 deflection)
Touch 23 FF 27
if i spent my first level feat on armor of the pit and took dodge as a bonus feat. i could have AC 33 with a touch of 24 and a flat footed of 29.
i know it's not as good as a fighter, but it sure as heck beats fighting unarmed at 12th level.
lets see the unarmed monk get an AC of 30 while beating the temple sword user at damage and have similarly decent saves.
in fact, to discount race, i won't factor armor of the pit or dodge, which weren't factored anyway. but could be if you captiolize on race.
this monk has plenty more feats to spend.
not counting bonus feats or racial feats. power attack and weapon focus (the only purchased 2) (3rd and 5th respectively). dodge as monk feat and armor of the pit as a 1st level feat make the AC harder to beat.
dodge and the tiefling feat were deliberately not factored.
How do you do that ? I mean, you have 20 from BAB, maybe +8 from strength, and +5 from your weapon. You still have +5 to find.
my math was wrong, so it's a 34, but still close enough.
At level assuming the game makes it that far
2d10 averages out to 11
1d8 averages out to 4.5power attack would be a -6 to hit but it is still a +18
That means the total is 22.5
The fist is 2d10 out to 11, and with power attack, it means +12, which goes to 23. Fists are actually better (by 0,5) in average, and way better with maximum damage. the difference is in critical.
You are not accounting for the crit range of the temple sword so it will pull ahead.
@rynjin : I agree with you.
At level 12 the monk is definitely ahead with the temple sword.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
ok so im at work right now, so im going of memmory so bear with me.
13th level monk with dimension door and dimensional agility. once a grapple lands "Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform."
if you cannot move you cannot fly or even hover, so by raw if you grapple a flying creature they hit the ground like a rock. my tetori has Boots of the Cat which allow me to take minimum damage from falling. so the dragon takes xd6 (height/10 -10).
he literally powerbombs dragons.
at 13 he has cmd of 45 and a cmb of 33 (+ true strike as a SLA)which is enough to grab a cmd of 52 on a 2+. my gm was thoroughly impressed, when he was thinking the dragon would just strafe us with fire breath. then i powerbombed the dragon from 400 feet up dealing 39d6 damage.
yes, i admit the weakest class is the monk.
but the monk, isn't as far behind the other martials when he uses a weapon than when he uses his fists. he is still very far behind though. in fact, the cheaper weapon and freed amulet slot make up a fair bit of difference.
the monk's weapon based flurry attack bonus, is much like a 2weapon ranger against nonfavored enemeies, with the exception that he requires one weapon instead of 2.
or like a nonsmiting archery paladin without the range but with less feats spent. those 2 classes and build types, bearing a similar level of M.A.D.
Hovering is not flying, but let's say I give you that..
If the dragon is fighting he is normally within breath weapon range, so probably no more than 120 feet up for a line affect. That is 12d6.
The average is 42 points of damage.
edit-I see it is likely to be a cone affect.
For a CR 20ish red dragon the cone is only 60 feet.
Now lets be reasonable and assume the dragon was a CR 14 adult red dragon.
The breath weapon is 50 feet, and the stock monster from the book has invisiblity as spell so that is a +20. It has a stealth bonus of +12 for a +32. You throw in the distance modifiers, and at 400 feet that is another +40...However since the dragon has to get to 50 feet for the cone to tag the party lets be nice and assume get another perception check at 100 feet. Why 100 feet? Well the dragon has a fly speed of 200 so he can move in at 100 feet per round with no penalty to stealth.
So now the dragon is sitting at +42 before he even rolls the stealth check. Let assume he get a 10 for a 52 total.
Most likely he will not be noticed. More than likely the monk can survive the breath attack.
Lets say for sake of ease the monk slams the dragon from 100 feet instead, which is more realistic anyway.
That is 10d6 for about 35 points of damage. Well the dragon won't really trying to break free. With haste and shield already in play his AC is 34, and not counting the penalties from stealth he has +1 to attack, and an extra attack. The monk is about to be shredded unless someone saves him.
Now for this CMB issue.
13+4(grab I think)+8(Str bonus, possible but not likely). ok, I see a +25 CMB. 8 are missing.
|
|
you're trying to pick apart an anecdote based on speculation of how you think it happened? how about the dragon was flying towards us from his mountain perch smart guy...
second you're assuming that this dragon was about to "shred" me with his prone+grappled ac when i have 4 other players about to full attack/spell cast on him?
stop trying to "win" the conversation, you last post is pure fallacy. and stating that "one or 2 archetypes" desnt make the class good, doesnt hold weight. the fact is that if you build your monk right it will do what you want it to do well enough.
and i wouldnt call 6 awesome archetypes 1 or 2.
you're trying to pick apart an anecdote based on speculation of how you think it happened? how about the dragon was flying towards us from his mountain perch smart guy...
second you're assuming that this dragon was about to "shred" me with his prone+grappled ac when i have 4 other players about to full attack/spell cast on him?
stop trying to "win" the conversation, you last post is pure fallacy. and stating that "one or 2 archetypes" desnt make the class good, doesnt hold weight. the fact is that if you build your monk right it will do what you want it to do well enough.
and i wouldn't call 6 awesome archetypes 1 or 2.
then it isn't the "monk" who owned the dragon, but the "group" ganging up on the dragon.
and how does the monk wrap his tiny arms around the dragon's massive wings to stop his flight?
|
Frankly, I'm amazed a monk can even cover 400 feet in one abundant step.
As for the dragon's stealth abilties, that assumes the dragon was hiding. It's entirely possible that the dragon wasn't bothering to, especially since dragons are arrogant and like to strike fear in their targets. Why would a red dragon bother sneaking up on something that it doesn't consider an actual threat?
@TheSideKick
Say what you want about wraithstrike's posts but ONE thing is true without doubt, the dragon couldn't have taken more than 40 damage from the fall (that's higher than average, but not max, damage on the dice), so how did the monk contributed to defeating the dragon? By bringing him down to the ground so the party can shred him?
I am not saying that this wasn't a good contribution, i am trying to understand what the monk did.
you're trying to pick apart an anecdote based on speculation of how you think it happened? how about the dragon was flying towards us from his mountain perch smart guy...
second you're assuming that this dragon was about to "shred" me with his prone+grappled ac when i have 4 other players about to full attack/spell cast on him?
stop trying to "win" the conversation, you last post is pure fallacy. and stating that "one or 2 archetypes" desnt make the class good, doesnt hold weight. the fact is that if you build your monk right it will do what you want it to do well enough.
and i wouldnt call 6 awesome archetypes 1 or 2.
I think I said 3 or 4 archetypes.
With that aside you played up how the fight went, and made it sound like your monk owned dragons. It got one dragon on a technicality. Of course I am going to pick it apart. I said that a few post ago.Even flying from his perch he should have been invisible, and/or maybe if he saw that you were ready for him he should used a different tactic.
When you build a monk and show us how it is consistent without 3 or 4 archetypes then the monk, not those archetypes will get credit.
Having contrived or GM-aided scenarios also does not help.
Now if your monk was as goo as you said it was, you would not be offended. You could have just picked about how I would have used the dragon.
No need to get upset, just prove me wrong.
yes, i admit the weakest class is the monk.
but the monk, isn't as far behind the other martials when he uses a weapon than when he uses his fists. he is still very far behind though. in fact, the cheaper weapon and freed amulet slot make up a fair bit of difference.
the monk's weapon based flurry attack bonus, is much like a 2weapon ranger against nonfavored enemeies, with the exception that he requires one weapon instead of 2.
or like a nonsmiting archery paladin without the range but with less feats spent. those 2 classes and build types, bearing a similar level of M.A.D.
While I agree with you Lumiere I think this is just a case where the rules shoehorn you into a different build than the flavor of the class encourages.
I actually saw the same thing when I was discussing the Rogue in another thread where the Strength based Rogue was actually almost on par with the Ranger vs non favored enemies but very few people who make a Rogue are looking to go with a burly musclebound guy just like few people making a Monk are looking for a guy who swings around a sweet magic sword people looking for that tend to gravitate towards a fighter etc. who's flavor just fits better.
As a result while the ideal builds for the monk may be okay in terms of functionality the sacrifices necessary to get to the okay/good state kind of kill the class overall. This is my personal opinion and while I would love to be proven wrong I haven't found a way to make a generally good monk using non ideal picks of archetype or weapon while doing the same with a paladin, bard, etc is quite feasible. That in my mind is a bad class.
true. any way to work around strength is inferior to being strength based in the first place. building a viable martial character requires you to pretty much be a burly and muscular individual.
and any way to work around archery or 2handed combat is inferior to archery or 2handed combat. either due to investment, or whatever.
plus the Oni-Blooded Zen-Swordsman can only be done so many times and is done better with a barbarian.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly, I'm amazed a monk can even cover 400 feet in one abundant step.
As for the dragon's stealth abilties, that assumes the dragon was hiding. It's entirely possible that the dragon wasn't bothering to, especially since dragons are arrogant and like to strike fear in their targets. Why would a red dragon bother sneaking up on something that it doesn't consider an actual threat?
Arrogant does not equal stupid. At level 13 the players most likely have done something of note, and no dragon wants to die to humanoids.
@TheSideKick
Say what you want about wraithstrike's posts but ONE thing is true without doubt, the dragon couldn't have taken more than 40 damage from the fall (that's higher than average, but not max, damage on the dice), so how did the monk contributed to defeating the dragon? By bringing him down to the ground so the party can shred him?
I am not saying that this wasn't a good contribution, i am trying to understand what the monk did.
It was 400ish feet which led to 39d6 which is close to 137 damage on average. The monk can DD 520 feet.
So with the GM attacking head on his scenario is possible, but not something most GM's would use if they want to really make things challenging.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
@TheSideKick
Say what you want about wraithstrike's posts but ONE thing is true without doubt, the dragon couldn't have taken more than 40 damage from the fall (that's higher than average, but not max, damage on the dice), so how did the monk contributed to defeating the dragon? By bringing him down to the ground so the party can shred him?
I am not saying that this wasn't a good contribution, i am trying to understand what the monk did.It was 400ish feet which led to 39d6 which is close to 137 damage on average. The monk can DD 520 feet.
So with the GM attacking head on his scenario is possible, but not something most GM's would use if they want to really make things challenging.
Falling Damage Caps at 20D6 or 70 on average. plus the Dragon's DR mitigates falling damage to an Extent, because the damage from the fall was not inflicted with a magic weapon.
|
|
Arrogant does not equal stupid. At level 13 the players most likely have done something of note, and no dragon wants to die to humanoids.Frankly, I'm amazed a monk can even cover 400 feet in one abundant step.
As for the dragon's stealth abilties, that assumes the dragon was hiding. It's entirely possible that the dragon wasn't bothering to, especially since dragons are arrogant and like to strike fear in their targets. Why would a red dragon bother sneaking up on something that it doesn't consider an actual threat?
True, but humanoids don't normally have a way of counterattacking something that's 400 feet in the air besides shoot arrows at it, and that's a -4 to hit for range increments.
If I were that dragon, I might not recognize that this specific group of humanoids were the ones that had done something of note. All puny humanoids look alike, after all. If they were in my territory, I probably would fly over and strafe them with my fire breath a few times just to put the Fear of Dragon into their heart, and let them run back to their pathetic thatched-roof cottages and tell the others so they can all quake with fear at my splendor.
It all depends on how much street cred the PCs actually have at this point, how much of it a dragon would be likely to care about, and whether or not this dragon is the "plot the humans' downfall from atop my hoard" type or the "rule by fear and demand tribute" type.
Besides, a lot of GMs don't play dragons as tactically as they probably should, mainly because they WANT the PCs to have an epic battle with the most legendary thing in the game, and actually have a chance of winning.
You are not accounting for the crit range of the temple sword so it will pull ahead.
Accounting for critical, fighting the monster you wrote have 36 AC. Not accounting for spells, that can boosts all of them by almost the same amount.
1/ Monk unarmed :
+34 to hit [your number]
Routine of +32/+32/+27/+27/+22/+22/+17 without PA.
Damage of 2d10 [base] + 8 [STR] + 5 [amulet] = 2d10 + 13 [average 24]
Damage of [2d10 + 13] x 2 [critical] = average of 48.
Average damage per round : (15/20*24 + 4/20*1/20*24 + 16/20*1/20*48)x2 +
(10/20*24 + 9/20*1/20*24 + 11/20*1/20*48)x2 +
(5/20*24 + 14/20*1/20*24 + 6/20*1/20*48)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*24 + 1/20*1/20*48)
= (18+0.24+1.92)x2 + (12+0.54+1.32)x2 + (6+0.84+0.72)x2 + (1.14+0.12)
= 40.32 + 27.72 + 15.12 + 1.26
= 84.42
Routine of +26/+26/+21/+21/+16/+16/+11 with PA.
Damage of 2d10 [base] + 8 [STR] + 5 [amulet] + 12 [PA] = 2d10 + 25 [average 36]
Damage of [2d10 + 25] x 2 [critical] = average of 72.
Average damage per round : (9/20*36 + 10/20*1/20*36 + 10/20*1/20*72)x2 +
(4/20*36 + 15/20*1/20*36 + 5/20*1/20*72)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*36 + 1/20*1/20*72)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*36 + 1/20*1/20*72)
= (16.2+0.9+1.8)x2 + (7.2+1.35+0.9)x2 + (1.71+0.18)x2 + (1.71+0.18)
= 37.8 + 18.9 + 3.78 + 1.89
= 62.37
A monk to hit, is so low that PA lower its average damage, when unarmed.
2/ Monk armed with temple sword :
+34 to hit [your number]
Routine of +32/+32/+27/+27/+22/+22/+17 without PA.
Damage of 1d8 [base] + 8 [STR] + 5 [sword] = 1d8 + 13 [average 17.5]
Damage of [1d8 + 13] x 2 [critical] = average of 35.
Average damage per round : (14/20*17.5 + 4/20*2/20*17.5 + 16/20*2/20*35)x2 +
(9/20*17.5 + 9/20*2/20*17.5 + 11/20*2/20*35)x2 +
(4/20*17.5 + 14/20*2/20*17.5 + 6/20*2/20*35)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*17.5 + 1/20*1/20*35)
= (12.25 + 0.35 + 2.8)x2 + (7.875 + 0.7875 + 1.925)x2 + (3.5 + 0.004 + 1.05)x2 + (0.83125 + 0.0875)
= 30.8 + 21.175 + 9.108 + 0.91875
= 62.00175
Routine of +26/+26/+21/+21/+16/+16/+11 with PA.
Damage of 1d8 [base] + 8 [STR] + 5 [amulet] + 18 [PA] = 1d8 + 31 [average 35.5]
Damage of [1d8 + 31] x 2 [critical] = average of 71.
Average damage per round : (8/20*35.5 + 10/20*2/20*35.5 + 10/20*2/20*71)x2 +
(3/20*35.5 + 15/20*2/20*35.5 + 5/20*2/20*71)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*35.5 + 1/20*1/20*71)x2 +
(19/20*1/20*35.5 + 1/20*1/20*71)
= (14.2 + 1.775 + 3.55)x2 + (5.325 + 2.6625 + 1.775)x2 + (1.68625 + 0.1775)x2 + (1.68625 + 0.1775)
= 39.05 + 19.525 + 3.6075 + 1.80375
= 63.98625
For the armed monk, we can see that PA procure +2 damage average at 20th level. It still is subpar compared to unarmed monk without PA.
3/ Standard Two Handed Fighter, with two handed sword (not accounting for critical x3 and auto confirm critical, 20th level fighter capability, nor keen, as I didn't account for that in the monk stats either, but that would increase the gap even more).
Attack bonus : +20 [BBA] + 9 [STR, not optimized] + 6 [weapon master] + 5 [weapon] + 2 [weapon focus] = +42 (basic fighter)
Routine of +42/+37/+32/+27 without PA
Damage of 2d6 [base] + 13 [STR] + 5 [weapon] + 6 [weapon master] + 4 [specialization] = 2d6 + 28 (average 35)
Critical damage of [2d6+28] x 2 [critical] = 70
Average damage per round : (17/20*35 + 1/20*2/20*35 + 19/20*2/20*70) +
(17/20*35 + 1/20*2/20*35 + 19/20*2/20*70) +
(14/20*35 + 4/20*2/20*35 + 16/20*2/20*70) +
(9/20*35 + 9/20*2/20*35 + 11/20*2/20*70)
= (29.75 + 0.175 + 6.65) + (29.75 + 0.175 + 6.65) + (24.5 + 0.7 + 5.6) + (15.75 + 1.575 + 3.85)
= 36.575 + 36.575 + 30.8 + 21.175
= 125.125
Routine of +36/+31/+26/+21 with PA
Damage of 2d6 [base] + 13 [STR] + 5 [weapon] + 6 [weapon master] + 4 [specialization] + 18 [PA] = 2d6 + 46 (average 53)
Critical damage of [2d6+46] x 2 [critical] = 106
Average damage per round : (17/20*53 + 1/20*2/20*53 + 19/20*2/20*106) +
(13/20*53 + 5/20*2/20*53 + 15/20*2/20*106) +
(8/20*53 + 10/20*2/20*53 + 10/20*2/20*106) +
(3/20*53 + 15/20*2/20*53 + 5/20*2/20*106)
= (45.05 + 0.265 + 10.07) + (34.45 + 1.325 + 7.95) + (21.2 + 2.65 + 5.3) + (7.95 + 3.975 + 2.65)
= 55.385 + 43.725 + 29.15 + 14.575
= 142.835 (or almost 20 more average damage per round)
We can see that the fighter does twice the damage of the armed monk (PA or not PA) or unarmed monk with PA, and 70% more while PA compared to an unarmed monk without PA (as PA reduce its damage).
That's HUGE. And he will have more AC, and other advantages. And he only invested 5 feats (PA, WF, GWF, WS, GWS, automatic for all fighter).
then i powerbombed the dragon from 400 feet up dealing 39d6 damage.
No, you can't :
Creatures that fall take 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet fallen, to a maximum of 20d6
|
Sooo....your suggestion is to alter the AP so the Monk sucks enough to justify this thread??
The fact is, against a humanoid AP or encounters, CMB monks (even vanilla, like this guy) are pretty badass.
Your player is then happy to play an AP that have been pretty much designed to favor maneuvers. Except it normally represent not even 10% of what you encounter, and there have SOOO many ways to counter them it's awful.
Does your monk take an oppotunity at EACH maneuver he attempts ? And what point buy do you use (if not point buy, what system, and what abilities does he have) ? What are the other players' characters ? There are so many questions, but even answering those three could explain a lot of things.
Well, I mean sure...its easy to see why you would think the designers of Curse of the Crimson Throne said to themselves "gee selves, in several years from this very date, people on the interwebz will hate on the monks, so let us design a game solely around maneuvers and our new fangled CMB mechanic that hasn't been invented yet...."
Only they didn't.
Also, I'd like to see how humanoids are only 10% of what most people encounter during adventures. Please list the AP's and scenarios where the 10% applies.
I use a 20 point buy, much like PFS. The rest of the party consists of a fighter/cleric, a 2wf fighter, a rogue (omg no, they suck as bad as monks do! except this one, because he's pretty badass too!) and a bard. All Human, except the rogue (a lousy class that never hits or gets Sneak Attack, except when he pretty much always gets SA even though everyone knows that never happens....he is a Halfling).
LOL but again, we ALL know that real world examples and experiences don't mean a hill of those warm stinky butt tootsie rolls my dog leaves on the carpet.
Monks and Rogues suck.
Except when they don't.
Arrogant does not equal stupid. At level 13 the players most likely have done something of note, and no dragon wants to die to humanoids.Frankly, I'm amazed a monk can even cover 400 feet in one abundant step.
As for the dragon's stealth abilties, that assumes the dragon was hiding. It's entirely possible that the dragon wasn't bothering to, especially since dragons are arrogant and like to strike fear in their targets. Why would a red dragon bother sneaking up on something that it doesn't consider an actual threat?
True, but humanoids don't normally have a way of counterattacking something that's 400 feet in the air besides shoot arrows at it, and that's a -4 to hit for range increments.
If I were that dragon, I might not recognize that this specific group of humanoids were the ones that had done something of note. All puny humanoids look alike, after all. If they were in my territory, I probably would fly over and strafe them with my fire breath a few times just to put the Fear of Dragon into their heart, and let them run back to their pathetic thatched-roof cottages and tell the others so they can all quake with fear at my splendor.
It all depends on how much street cred the PCs actually have at this point, how much of it a dragon would be likely to care about, and whether or not this dragon is the "plot the humans' downfall from atop my hoard" type or the "rule by fear and demand tribute" type.
Besides, a lot of GMs don't play dragons as tactically as they probably should, mainly because they WANT the PCs to have an epic battle with the most legendary thing in the game, and actually have a chance of winning.
Dragons are definitely legendary, but most outsiders are just as difficult to beat if played intelligently.
legend is not a measure of power.
and Epic Dragonslayers are usually born through sheer dumb luck, a major mistake by the dragon, or a once in a generation level of murderous prowess few mortals ever reach.
|
|
Sooo....your suggestion is to alter the AP so the Monk sucks enough to justify this thread??
The fact is, against a humanoid AP or encounters, CMB monks (even vanilla, like this guy) are pretty badass.
You mean against the things in the game against which it is the easiest to perform combat maneuvers against where they put zero effort into preventing it Monks can be badass?! My god stop the presses next you'll tell me that monks are awesome against mooks 6 levels lower than they are!
I mean against humanoid APs and Encounters.
The game designers have plenty of guys with a decent CMD.
Surely you can agree that the CMD of 10 + Dex + Str + size is considerably better than CMB of BAB + Str + size, esp against a 3/4 BAB who doesn't even match the base +10 until lvl 14....
My god stop the presses, next you'll tell me that the AP and Scenario designers do not factor that in at all???
Falling Damage Caps at 20D6 or 70 on average. plus the Dragon's DR mitigates falling damage to an Extent, because the damage from the fall was not inflicted with a magic weapon.@TheSideKick
Say what you want about wraithstrike's posts but ONE thing is true without doubt, the dragon couldn't have taken more than 40 damage from the fall (that's higher than average, but not max, damage on the dice), so how did the monk contributed to defeating the dragon? By bringing him down to the ground so the party can shred him?
I am not saying that this wasn't a good contribution, i am trying to understand what the monk did.It was 400ish feet which led to 39d6 which is close to 137 damage on average. The monk can DD 520 feet.
So with the GM attacking head on his scenario is possible, but not something most GM's would use if they want to really make things challenging.
I forgot about the 20d6 cap, and that is a basic rule. What is happening to me? <---Don't answer that. :)
Some people argue about the DR applying to falling damage. It does in my games, but I was trying to avoid a rules debate that I figured did not matter once I saw how the events played out.
Besides, a lot of GMs don't play dragons as tactically as they probably should, mainly because they WANT the PCs to have an epic battle with the most legendary thing in the game, and actually have a chance of winning.
Very true. :)
maths
Thanks for the maths. I guess those other +5 enhancement bonuses on the sword might be needed then. I am too lazy to build a level 20 monk though.
but the problem with the unarmed monk pulling ahead at 20th level, is that he is 20th level, which is a level no group really reaches, and is a level where resources no longer matter and the monk can actually have his +5 amulet.
it isn't that the monk was ahead all the way to 20th. it's that he pulled ahead at 20th when he no longer gave a damn about resources because he had so much wealth
lets see a level 12 unarmed monk.
a level 8 unarmed monk
and a level 4 unarmed monk
i will allow somebody else to build the temple sword monk. the temple sword user can steal my scattered info if they please as well.