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???
Bomanz we have you saying one thing and Dabbler with a different version of events in the same AP. What book are you in?
@Lumiere :
Yeah, the temple sword monk is not behind the unarmed monk from 1st to 20th level (only from 4th without accounting for magic weapon/amulet, and difficult to gauge accounting for magic weapon/amulet).
But never it will be on par with the fighter, not even once through the 20 levels. Not even accounting for the sup attack from ki. And PA is nuts for monks, except when you deal with numerous low CR (who have low AC) monsters at most encounters.
|
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...
I said "most legendary", not "most difficult".
If you want to TPK your party, there's definitely more lethal choices in the Bestiaries. I believe the Tarrasque holds the record for making PCs void their bowels, but the literature nerd in me prefers the Jabberwocky.
Dragons, however, hold the undisputed record for making PCs squeal in glee at the thought of actually getting to say they've slain one. Heck, the game that Pathfinder is adapted from, and that most of us grew up playing, was NAMED AFTER them. Players and GMs alike have built up dragons in their imagination as being the Ultimate Accomplishment for adventurers. The fact that TheSideKick is using "powerbombed a dragon" as the best example of his monk's combat prowess proves that they're the greatest feather in any player's cap. Once you've fought a dragon and lived to tell the tale, You Win Pathfinder. The rest is just New Game Plus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pfft.
Dragons are nothing compared with a hit squad of Spriggans with some mind control voodoo whatsits.
That s!!* is scary, yo.
Indeed, monks CAN scout. They are the fourth-best scouts in the game, right behind rogues, bards, and rangers. Who all scout better, and can do a lot else besides.
"Can scout" is not the same as "good at scouting".
You forgot druid, inquisitor, and summoner.
Druids can shape into small or tiny animals that have large stealth bonuses and that people are likely to ignore anyways or into small earth elementals that can avoid passing through doorways and other locations that are likely to have alarms. You have to really contrive things for druids to not be the best scouts in the game.
Inquisitors have invisibility and silence and expeditious retreat and monster lore and are better at bluffing or fighting their way out of trouble if they get caught. As troubled as the stealth rules are those are more valuable than a bit of extra movement at high levels.
Summoners, of course, can build their eidolon for stealth and special senses and even if it becomes completely useless in combat can fall back on their summon SLA. Because of their link the eidolon can report back in a continuous fashion without the whispering of the message cantrip and even if it "dies" it's a renewable resource.
A case can be made for wizards as well. Cross-class skills are no longer penalized and they have all sorts of stealth and movement boosting spells. It impairs their usual primary role, but if you need a scout and are willing to take something as otherwise limited as a monk a second wizard will probably be better.
I'd say monk is the seventh or eighth best scout. That's not even in the top third.
Rogues and rangers make good scouts, but their 30 speed can lead to them being caught, surrounded, and generally in a bad way. Not a problem the scouting monk faces.
I mean, I love rogues and rangers and their scouting potential, but damn they are slow some days on a 30.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Tarrasque is actually not that good for it's CR, and while PF gave it a ranged attacked, getting one into negative is not that difficult unless you are not prepared for it at all.
That is unlikely since it basically takes a GM plot device to get rid of it.
Dragons however are just awesome when played to their full potential.
@gnomersy : exactly.
Move 40 or 50 doesn't save you when you walk into a trap that closes the doors behind you while the room fills with po'd nasties....
Rogues and rangers make good scouts, but their 30 speed can lead to them being caught, surrounded, and generally in a bad way. Not a problem the scouting monk faces.I mean, I love rogues and rangers and their scouting potential, but damn they are slow some days on a 30.
An AP has a trap similar to this one.. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Lumiere :
Yeah, the temple sword monk is not behind the unarmed monk from 1st to 20th level (only from 4th without accounting for magic weapon/amulet, and difficult to gauge accounting for magic weapon/amulet).
But never it will be on par with the fighter, not even once through the 20 levels. Not even accounting for the sup attack from ki. And PA is nuts for monks, except when you deal with numerous low CR (who have low AC) monsters at most encounters.
i know the monk is forever drastically behind the fighter, but it hits at right were a 3/4 bab class should when power attacking. (10+)
magic temple sword is cheaper than magic amulet of mighty fists, more common, and will likely have a higher bonus at certain levels.
in fact, it is safe to assume the sword will have a bonus +1 higher than than the amulet in most cases, and the power attack bonus to damage more than makes up for the missing damage dice. until 20th.
in fact, to swiftly kill most foes, you kind of have to power attack, because such things as damage reduction can greatly cut into the impact of your swings.
the 12th level temple sword user i presented has a 55% chance on his first 2 attacks to hit a CR12 AC of 27 when power attacking. not the best accuracy, but we are talking about an RPG where you don't require excessive optimization to be viable.
i apologize if i offended you.
i'm not saying the monk is anywhere near as good as a fighter, i merely intended to point out the superiority of armed combat against unarmed combat.
but i prefer glaives and cesti over greatswords for many reasons. more strike range, more AoO range, less AoOs provoked against larger foes, and the synergy with enlargement and the like.
my problem with monks, is the lack of a reach weapon, and the lack of ability to augment accuracy to the levels of a barbarian or fighter. but at least they aren't too far behind a 2WF ranger against nonfavored enemies.
but monks, like rogues, were intended to be a support class and while a rogue has more out of combat solutions, a monk pays for their scaling defenses with poor offense.
|
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.
Could you answer the question posed to you here?
Does only positive real-world experience count, then? We say the monk is a weak class, we have played it and found it a weak class, and we can crunch the numbers to prove it. You say the monk is not a weak class, that you have experience of it not being a weak class in game, so please deliver the numbers that prove it - I'd LOVE to find a way to make monks that didn't suck badly in most boss encounters over 10th level (based on my experience of playing a monk in CotCT among others).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
Could you answer the question posed to you here?
Does only positive real-world experience count, then? We say the monk is a weak class, we have played it and found it a weak class, and we can crunch the numbers to prove it. You say the monk is not a weak class, that you have experience of it not being a weak class in game, so please deliver the numbers that prove it - I'd LOVE to find a way to make monks that didn't suck badly in most boss encounters over 10th level (based on my experience of playing a monk in CotCT among others).
I'll post builds tomorrow or tuesday. I need to contact the players and get their sheets.
I'll post builds tomorrow or tuesday. I need to contact the players and get their sheets.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.
Could you answer the question posed to you here?
Does only positive real-world experience count, then? We say the monk is a weak class, we have played it and found it a weak class, and we can crunch the numbers to prove it. You say the monk is not a weak class, that you have experience of it not being a weak class in game, so please deliver the numbers that prove it - I'd LOVE to find a way to make monks that didn't suck badly in most boss encounters over 10th level (based on my experience of playing a monk in CotCT among others).
Get ready to be crushed. The only time Monks shine is when other players are bad builders.
I know this, because I like the Monk concept/class a lot, and spent more time than is probably healthy trying to make one work.
Making one work takes a bit of effort, but it's doable. I'm running a Monk now that "works".
The issue is making one that can at least come close to matching the Ranger, Barbarian, or Fighter. I needed a 3 level dip into Brawler just to bring myself up to a mere 1-2 to-hit/damage behind our Barbarian, and he's likely to outpace me again fairly soon.
His job is basically to back up the Rogue/Red Mantis while he's scouting (kinda funny considering the previous conversation) and to deal a decent chunk of damage in regular combat through either triggering AoOs (he's a MoMS with Panther/Snake/Dragon Styles) or just punching people in the noggin.
Well that seems desperate to match the ranger, barbarian or fighter's damage. You should play those classes if you want your character to be just like them. Then you follow them perfectly, and don't have to worry about fitting the square monk (with their defensive abilities, flurry and limited ki pool) into the round hole of moar damage all the time.
The monk though, it was ported in a lazy fashion from 3.5. It would be far better if they took it in new directions. Go heavy nasty monk, which many people want, give them a ki rage "focus" or "the way of death", bonus to str and dex, instead of the barb's str and con. Allow some special mook smashing ability, or drain abilities, psionics--there have been so many good ideas on this board.
Unfortunately, they don't get listened to and adopted. So, dms should just modify the monk how they wish. I for instance allow 3.5 feats, so with flying kick, canny defence, powerful charge, vexing flanker, the monks I play and see in my games are just fine.
All these problems of the monk, they were solved in 3.0 splat books.
Got another idea champs, now that I am thinking about the monk. It is fluffy and fits with the theme.
Meditation
The idea is simple, if the fighter is sturdy and goes as long as they have equipment, and the barbarian goes strong as long as they have rage, the monk becomes very neat, but quite short term. Perhaps a bit like a wizard in that sense.
A buff (to hit (+3)/to touch ac (+3)/to a single ability score (+3)/fast healing 1) could apply for a limited time. Does this apply at the start of the day? Is it activated like rage? That is entirely up to the dm and what works in a power sense with the setting.
Ki points try to get around this, give some cool stuff, but they don't last anywhere near as long as barbarian rage/cleric buffs.
Now this will probably encourage the 15 minute adventure day, but a dm can get around that and keep pushing. Such a buff could allow monks to be more effective in certain areas (Ok, I'm on the hit bonus/okay I've beefed a save stat so I'll be good/yes, my str is now very high, let's get to work breaking heads).
Could make it usable more than once a day, but it requires 2 hours of meditation, only 1 hour in the morning as you set off. The journey of a thousand miles begins with one meditation buff in the morning.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well it's not really "more damage all the time" I'm looking for, but I want a credible completely unarmed warrior with some neat abilities.
Monk fits that bill. The problem being that even the Monk is better at armed combat than unarmed combat, and the neat abilities either come in too late, cost too much KI for the small size of it, or come with some hefty drawbacks (this is ignoring the nigh useless ones. Lookin' at you, Wholeness of Body) that make them cool, but impractical.
Monk is by far my favorite class in concept. And I still love playing them. But dammit I wish they'd get a big overhaul to bring them more in line with other classes. Preferably shedding the overwhelming glut of special abilities that have VERY situational uses in favor of something more focused.
Recently(ish) I've been thinking the Monk should be one of two (or two separate) classes: A straight up melee brute (full BaB, D10 HD, ways to up his attack and damage without items) specializing in unarmed combat with a few "magical" abilities based around enhancing his physical abilities to super-human heights (High Jump as an actual "leap tall buildings in a single bound" type of thing as one) with less of the meditative and spiritual based abilities.
OR, a 6 level caster (same BaB and HD as now) that fits in somewhere between the Bard and Magus, who gets some good support and self-buffing abilities that make him a credible fighter, kind of bridging the gap between the "Make everybody better at everything forever" Bard and the "Nova like a star on the Science Channel" Magus. Generally having a good amount of damaging/debuffing touch attack spells, and enhanced versions of the more meditative stuff (Wholeness of Body for example). Perhaps this variant could have each of the special physical attacks from across the archetypes (Stunning Fist, Punishing Kick, Touch of Serenity, etc.) to give it more of a melee range debuffer role.
You might want to check The Quintessential Monk and Beyond Monks.
I too think the monk can be broken in half, into nimble brute and ability-mystical heavy sage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quintessential Monk is pretty neat. The PrCs and some of the Feats especially.
For a damager the one Feat that lets you add +1 damage per 10 ft of your movement not used in a charge is cool. Actually gives a combat purpose to Fast Movement, which is great.
Haven't looked at Beyond Monks yet though.
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.
Ok for some reason i assumed that the dragon was on 100ish feet and not a lot higher, i don't know how i got that, i am sorry for the mistake.
Seeing again sidekick's post i see a "(height/10-10)" mentioned next to a xd6, does anyone know what that is?
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.
Ok for some reason i assumed that the dragon was on 100ish feet and not a lot higher, i don't know how i got that, i am sorry for the mistake.
Seeing again sidekick's post i see a "(height/10-10)" mentioned next to a xd6, does anyone know what that is?
He was referring to his magical item that allow him to take minimal falling. I am assuming he was equating 10d6 of falling damage with 10 hit points of damage, just as an example of why he can fall from greater heights, and not worry about it.
and because of that, smart monks focus on the temple sword instead. even in most JRPGs and TBSGs
From what I have seen, most monks focus on unarmed because that is the emphasis of the class, and that's what is thematically 'cool' about the monk. That's why it's a problem that unarmed sucks. I don't disagree it shouldn't suck for most, but if the point of a class is that it can fighter unarmed, you make the class suck if you make unarmed suck at least for that class.
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.
Of course they didn't, but that doesn't change the fact that the first three adventures in CotCT are urban-based with largely humanoid foes and this plays to the monk and rogue strengths, such as they are. After that, not so much, as you will discover.
As for other APs, only Council of Thieves to my knowledge has this much focus on urban adventure. In the others I have read or played to date urban adventure usually features in only one of six modules.
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.
They certainly don't to you if they disagree with what you believe. I have already pointed out my experiences with a monk IN THE VERY SAME ADVENTURE PATH you quote. Wraithstrike and others have pointed out that THEIR objections to the monk come not from theorycrafting but experience. The theorycrafting just backs up that experience, showing us not only were our characters weak, there was no way they could have been strong.
Monks and Rogues suck.
Except when they don't.
Sadly, they do a lot more often than they don't, though. Don't get me wrong, rogues are great scouts, it's just other classes are great scouts and can do other stuff as well. As for monks, well they are OK at maneuvers and their 'sweet spot' is from 2nd to 7th level, at which they can (just) hold their own. After that, they fall significantly behind other classes in offence and special abilities. Their defences can be good, but they are not stellar.
Rogues and rangers make good scouts, but their 30 speed can lead to them being caught, surrounded, and generally in a bad way. Not a problem the scouting monk faces.
I mean, I love rogues and rangers and their scouting potential, but damn they are slow some days on a 30.
Ranger can up it to 40' per turn with one 1st level spell. Both can go faster with one magic item (wand of expeditious retreat, boots of striding and sprining, boots of speed etc). It's really not an issue without a quick and easy in-game fix, and once you have that speed you have better skills and other abilities for scouting than the monk across the board.
Like I said, the monk can scout, but he's not intrinsically good at scouting.
My experience with monks at our table is that they tend to get built overly defensively and are often found ineffectively running around the battlefield, not getting hit, and resenting the full BAB martial characters ability to actually kill the enemies they face. Then occasionally grappling the holy hell out of a powerful caster to the GM's chagrin.
That being said, I like the monk as a class and I think that a monk built to give as a good as he gets would be useful and fun.
Finally, I'm always amazed by the sheer amount of vitriol I see on the boards about discussions of monks, rogues, and fighters (in that order).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel morally obligated to link this for those with monk woes.
Monk (Psionic) fixes pretty much every major problem that monks feel, provides options for countless monk themes, doesn't need tons of archetypes or hoop-jumping or specific races to function. Has been frequently used with standard 15 point buy without falling behind. It can be used for everything from venerable masters of an ancient esotetic martial art to elven assassins who use magical powers to stalk and kill their enemies.
Pretty much all the core monk features are present though most have been converted into "secrets" which are selectable class features obtained periodically throughout your career and there are other options for secrets (some of which encompass a few archetypes).
The class lacks a ki pool (because it would be redundant). Virtually everything that someone would need a ki pool for is covered by an expansive list of powers that double as choose-it-yourself class features (by selecting powers appropriate to your theme you can easily produce your perfect monk regardless of your concept).
You can find all the full details of the psionic system for free here: d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed and can purchase the book or pdf here: Psionics Unleashed Pdf, Print, or Bundle. Truly some of the best rules for 3.x/Pathfinder in existence. You can also check out Dreamscarred's website at DreamscarredPress.com.
From what I have seen, most monks focus on unarmed because that is the emphasis of the class, and that's what is thematically 'cool' about the monk. That's why it's a problem that unarmed sucks. I don't disagree it shouldn't suck for most, but if the point of a class is that it can fighter unarmed, you make the class suck if you make unarmed suck at least for that class
and because of that, smart monks focus on the temple sword instead. even in most JRPGs and TBSGs
even in most of the more recent ones, they learned that they couldn't fix unarmed. so most of the ones where punching things, isn't useless, get around that by such things as gauntlets, brass knuckles, handwraps, armored boots, and the like.
which is kinda like fighting unarmed
in most of the more recent JRPGs and TBSGs, they created special weapons just for the monk class. monk classes have evolved in those kind of systems. was my point about those systems.
a class who cannot wield weapons, in those virtual systems, were always behind the weapon users except at the earliest tier of levels, so their solution was to create an affordable weapon type, simply for unarmed combatants.
and quite a few of them have sword, polearm or staff options for their monks too. to represent archetypes such as the zen swordmaster, or even appeal to Lu-Bu fans (spear monk builds)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Final Fantasy Tactics did monks pretty well, Lumi. I recommend trying it out if you never have. They were arguably one of the stronger / more reliable classes in the game and humorously wore very little in terms of equipment (no weapons, no shields, no helmets, etc) and had an armor slot (which was reserved for clothing/cloth items) and two accessory slots (so you could wear magic trinkets).
They were exceptionally powerful in combat (mostly due to having an unarmed weapon power equal to their physical power which basically gave them huge returns for just being physically fit). They also had a wide variety of ki-based powers which had no limit to the frequency that you could use them (including strong healing powers, status ailment removal powers, the ability to throw ki/chi/qi/prana/whatever energy at enemies in the form of a ranged attack that dealt damage equal to their physical attacks, etc). They also had strong base statistics and good counter-moves (in fact the counterattack "counter" is a monk-ability).
Their "martial arts" skill granted the barehanded fighting strength to their new class if you shifted them. This was traditionally superior to weapons that you could equip on the class (for example, if you trained a character as a monk, switched them to a geomancer and gave them the martial arts support skill then they were probably dealing more damage than if you gave them a sword).
The only way weapons really come out on top in that game compared to monks as the best weapons in the game (the legendary sort such as the Excalibur, Chaos Blade, etc) is because they tend to have special abilities tied to them (Excalibur grants continuous haste + holy damage absorbtion for example), but on a pound for pound basis monks begin hitting extremely hard and continue to do so right to the end of the game when stuff gets goofy.
During the early portions of the game monks can seem downright overpowered. Since the statistical power of most of the classes in the game are based on their equipment (weapons for damage, armor for hp/mana, etc) the monk's ability to fight without such things make them very powerful at low through mid levels. Especially if you're leveling faster than the plot (random encounters scale and monster growth is far better than human growth, which means you can very quickly get outclassed by random chocobos, goblins, etc, if you're power-leveling early).
EDIT: Some art for novelty. :D
Monks.
Goblins.
The Dreaded Chocobo!
@Ashiel
sounds like Final Fantasy Tactics really made monks OP
because they sucked in the Tactics advanced Franchise (A1 and A2) and monk like characters such as Yang and Amarant, were lower tier martial characters compared to Cecil and Steiner from their respective games. Even Edge and Zidane from their respective games had at least a higher action economy and better damage per swing.
FF4
Yang; Useless Monk, slightly faster actions than cecil, only good for his HP growth, which is outclassed by Cecil's and unlike the holy knight, comes with poor defenses in a game where evasion is flawed
Edge; Broken Ninja w/ lotsa attacks, high crit chance, and amazing action economy. decent DPR
Cecil; paladin protagonist, good at curing statuses, decent defenses, has the benefit of the most advantageous weapon group in the game (swords) and can equip special swords nobody else can
FF9
Amarant; Mediocre Monk who gets little more than several instances of the HP plus skill, most of his skills are based on his poor magic attack, at his best, he was a powerful boss opponent
Steiner; knight, decent defenses, catches up easily, equips swords which have the advantage of being common and decent, has decent defensive skills that are less dependant on HP total
Zidane; theif protagonist, equips swords and daggers, both of which are highly advantageous groups. better action economy than amarant and slightly less damage than steiner. dyne skills are broken
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All I will say is that monks weren't overpowered in FFT. More like they were "just right". The beauty of that game is most all of the classes have their strong suits and even the basic classes like chemist, knight, black & white mage are solid end-gamers as well. Especially due to the super-multiclassing system.
Overpowered does exist in FFT. One NPC is notorious for destroying any semblance of difficulty in the game, and if you know what you're doing you can set your main character up in such a way that you can nuke everything on the screen including yourself for nigh-insta-kill damage while healing yourself and being immune to pretty much everything. But at the end of the day if you're not trying to squeeze every ounce of juice out of the mechanics you end up with a surprisingly awesome and well balanced game.
The game is also notoriously hard on your first few runs. :P
On the subject of traditional FF games, Sabin from Final Fantasy VI is one of the stronger characters in the game (as is his brother Edgar the Engineer). He was a physically powerful character with a wide variety of useful techniques (which you input similar to a fighting game) with each ability having certain pros and cons (Aura Bolt was a holy-elemental energy blast, pummel dealt moderate damage that penetrated defense, suplex was stronger against larger enemies IIRC, etc).
Final Fantasy I has monks and they are also notoriously powerful characters who don't require equipment to really be good (in fact while they begin the game with nunchakus and some armor, you should immediately de-quip them and watch both their offense and defense rise). When they become a master monk their damage skyrockets. If you check some of the party build guides on GameFAQs the monk is listed as an exception to the golden rule against single classed parties, noting that a party of monks is actually pretty capable of killing most anything in the game and is fairly gear-independent and can make up certain magical needs through the use of consumables (there are rods you can consume to cast a few spells here and there, and healing can be done with potions and such between fights). That sort of party can be pretty boring through (you pretty much just select "attack" for the entire game).
The monk I linked to a few posts back (again found here: Monk [Psionic]) can do both the weapons and the unarmed without weapons shtick very well (they have a scaling bonus to hit and damage with unarmed strikes and monk weapons, can enhance their unarmed attacks with the appropriate powers, and even have a secret that allows them to treat all their proficient weapons as monk weapons - including spears since you like Lu Bu). They can go without wearing armor because of powers like inertial armor (which grants a scaling armor bonus).
One of the more attractive options for the unarmed combatant monk is the rules concerning the delivery of touch spells/powers. You can deliver them through an unarmed attack and do not expend them on a miss. This allows the monk I posted to emphasize chi-based unarmed attacks through the usage of powers such as hammer or dissipating touch to great effect (especially for low-Strength Wisdom-based monks such as those of older ages, who have significantly more energy but weaker physical bodies).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
FFT Monk was nothing compared to the Sword Tech users.
Very true. Unfortunately, very little was comparable to the sword tech users. I did like Agrias though (her sword techs at least weren't as powerful due to her being female and thus having a better Matk growth than a Patk growth, which actually made her more balanced) and wished she got more "air time" after she officially joins your party (my biggest complaint with the game beyond needing bigger parties was the lack of dialog for special NPCs in latter portions of the game).
Izluda was kind of dicey for me. She was obscenely overpowered against any humanoid you encountered and damn near useless against monsters (due to her arts revolving around shattering equipment, which was also a bummer 'cause I'm the sort who stole anything not tied down so breaking it was sad :P).
Orlandu was a sick joke. :P
If you're good at FFT, it's actually amazingly fun to play through the game with your main character + generic characters only (or some of the less goofy named characters like Mustadio and Agrias).
** spoiler omitted **
The monk I linked to a few posts back (again found here: Monk [Psionic]) can do both the weapons and the unarmed without weapons shtick very well (they have a scaling bonus to hit and damage with unarmed strikes and monk weapons, can enhance their unarmed attacks with the appropriate powers, and even have a secret that allows them to treat all their proficient weapons as monk weapons - including spears since you like Lu Bu). They can go without wearing armor because of powers like inertial armor (which grants a scaling armor bonus).One of the more attractive options for the unarmed combatant monk is the rules concerning the delivery of touch spells/powers. You can deliver them through an unarmed attack and do not expend them on a miss. This allows the monk I posted to emphasize chi-based unarmed attacks through the usage of powers such as hammer or dissipating touch to great effect (especially for low-Strength Wisdom-based monks such as those of older ages, who have significantly more energy but weaker physical bodies).
As an example from the prototype thread we have something that seems bizarre and nonsensical to anyone familiar with Pathfinder monks. A monk who tanks Strength and is old age and is actually very playable and awesome!
Master Roshi CR 8
NG Old Medium humanoid (human, psionic) Monk 8
Init +3; Senses Perception +18
==========================================================================
AC 30, touch 22, flat-footed 26 (+7 armor, +6 wisdom, +2 monk, +3 dex, +1 natural, +1 deflection)
Hp 56 (8d8+16)
Fort +9, Ref +11, Will +14; +2 vs Enchantments
Immune disease
Defensive Abilities evasion, still mind, purity of body
==========================================================================
Speed 50 ft. (30 ft.)
Melee +2 unarmed strike +11 (1d10-1)
Flurry of Blows +2 unarmed strikes +10/+10/+5 (1d10-1)Monk Powers Known (ML 8th)
3rd (5PP) - Dimension Slide
2nd (3PP) - Painful Strikes, Strength of my Enemy, Hustle, Energy Missile
1st (1PP) - Metaphysical Weapon, Inertial Armor, Hammer, Vigor, Dissipating Touch
PP: 44 (32 remaining)
==========================================================================
Str 7, Dex 16 (14), Con 12 (10), Int 10, Wis 22 (20), Cha 9
Base Atk +6, CMB +4 (+9 w/unarmed), CMD 18
Feats Psionic Body (1), Psionic Dodge (B), Stunning Fist (B), Dodge (B) Deflect Arrows (B), Weapon Finesse (3), Expanded Knowledge (Dissipating Touch) (5), Mobility (B), Expanded Knowledge (Energy Missile) (7)
Equipment (33,000 gp) Turtle Shell of Resistance +2 (cloak of resistance), Chinese Robes of Constitution +2 (chest slot), belt of dexterity +2, ring of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +1, sunglasses of wisdom +2 (as headband of wisdom), walking stick (quarterstaff), 13,000 gp worth of gearOverview: Master Roshi is a skilled martial artist who lives on a small island out in the middle of the ocean, possibly because of his eccentric nature. Commonly called the Turtle Hermit, he practices a strange form of martial art that specializes in speed and the use of energy to overcome his opponents. Once per year, her participates in the World Tournament fighting (and owning) more mundane fighters with his mystical fighting arts. Commonly seen as a perverted old fart by his friends, his old age often makes foes underestimate him by appearance; which traditionally leads to their downfall after they taste the wrath of his ki-powered techniques, which are only improved by his aging wisdom.
Summary of Tactics: Master Roshi has a whopping 22 Wisdom, due to his focus on Wisdom and the mystical side of martial arts, combined with his +2 age modifier. His style relies primarily on Dexterity and Wisdom, and even with his aging bones catching up to him (-3 to Dex from age) he is still more spry than most thanks to his daily TV Pilates.
He typically manifests Inertial Armor (7 points) and Metaphysical Weapon (5 points) to get a +7 to AC and +2 to hit and damage for 8 hours. That's good enough to last him through a day of hunting down magical wish granting artifacts, or fighting armies of mooks. Against worthy opponents (those who aren't 1st level mooks) he may employ the following techniques to overcome his foes:
- He manifests painful strikes for 3 PP to make his unarmed strikes deal an additional +1d6 nonlethal damage on each attack for 8 rounds, bringing his unarmed strike damage to 1d10-1+1d6.
- He manifests strength of my enemy for 3 PP to deal 1 point of strength damage with each successful unarmed strike he lands for 8 rounds. This slowly enhances his own strength until he regains much of his youthful prowess.
- He manifests hammer, augmented to 8 PP, to get 8 touch attacks that deal 4d8 damage. He delivers these touch attacks via his unarmed strikes, allowing him to flurry with them, making his next 8 unarmed strikes deal 1d10-1+4d8 damage.
- He manifests dissipating touch, augmented to 8 PP, to gain a touch attack that deals 8d6 damage. He delivers it through an unarmed strike. This is flavored as him disrupting the matter in his target with his Chi.
- He manifests energy missile, which he calls "Turtle Devastation Wave" or "Kame-ha-meha" with between 3 to 8 power points. This allows him to blast up to 5 enemies (no two of which can be more than 15 ft apart) for 3d6 to 8d6 energy damage (he typically uses electricity damage, but will use sonic damage when attacking objects). This is his ultimate secret technique, and a nasty ranged surprise, as he can fire it up to 180 feet away.
I should roll Mustadio as a Gunslinger.
That would be funny but I don't think it'd capture Mustadio's coolness very well. At least not mechanically. But I suppose it's all in how you fluff it (I just find the PF gunslinger mechanics - especially the gun mechanics - really weird).
It would be pretty hot to recreate some of the characters though. Alchemists make for pretty good chemists (isn't there even a throw-infusion discovery or somesuch?). Psychic warrior (possibly with some homebrew) could probably pull off the Samurai and Sword-Knights.
@Lumiere : for your example of 12th level monk, the sword is indeed better than unarmed (39.8 without PA, 45.2 with PA for the sword, against 37.8 without PA and 34.02 with PA for fists).
But you will have low AC (30 at level 12 is similar to be hit 60-70% in average for natural attacks or for the first iterative attack).
@Lumiere : for your example of 12th level monk, the sword is indeed better than unarmed (39.8 without PA, 45.2 with PA for the sword, against 37.8 without PA and 34.02 with PA for fists).
But you will have low AC (30 at level 12 is similar to be hit 60-70% in average for natural attacks or for the first iterative attack).
30 is low, i know
1st level feat on armor of the pit, and bonus feat on dodge were my recommendations to bump the AC to 33 if you seriously considered this character.
i know armor of the pit is a racial feat, but even without it, 30 AC is liveable. it's not amazing, but it is workable when you have a halfway decent touch and not too shabby of saving throws. not quite paladin or barbarian tier, but definitely has better will than say a ranger or fighter. despite dealing much less damage than either.
a 70% to hit with primary is 45% to hit with secondary and 20% to hit with tertiary.
it's not negating the primary attacks i care so much about, as much as reducing the traction of the secondary and tertiary attacks.
the one big attack hits hard, which i know, but those lotsa smaller attacks have multiple rolls at smaller bonuses.
a 70% to hit with primary is 45% to hit with secondary and 20% to hit with tertiary.
Except most creatures hit only with primary attacks, and have only few or none secondary attacks.
So that mean you will be hit by 70% of attacks that matters for the monster, and 45% of attacks that matters less. It's very important to notice.
And monsters do way more damage than a monk, and a monk have less HP than a fighter. So a monk will be hit more often, with less hit he can handle. And he will be waaaay behind for damage himself. And that's for a monk which is pretty good in strength with certainly the best race for monks.
So, to answer OP's point of view : no, monks are not mislabeled, they are misconcieved. They lack of synergy in about everything they do, and their class features are far from awesome. It's not love that they need (it is certainly one of the most beloved class from players), but good class features.
a 70% to hit with primary is 45% to hit with secondary and 20% to hit with tertiary.Except most creatures hit only with primary attacks, and have only few or none secondary attacks.
So that mean you will be hit by 70% of attacks that matters for the monster, and 45% of attacks that matters less. It's very important to notice.
And monsters do way more damage than a monk, and a monk have less HP than a fighter. So a monk will be hit more often, with less hit he can handle. And he will be waaaay behind for damage himself. And that's for a monk which is pretty good in strength with certainly the best race for monks.
So, to answer OP's point of view : no, monks are not mislabeled, they are misconcieved. They lack of synergy in about everything they do, and their class features are far from awesome. It's not love that they need (it is certainly one of the most beloved class from players), but good class features.
i know the monk is screwed. even with a temple sword, a high strength, the best possible race (the onispawn tiefling from blood of fiends)
for 2 feats, one of which is tiefling exclusive, you can turn the 70% hit chance into a 55% hit chance. but the fact is, the monk still sucks, even with the best weapon choice, the best racial selection, and exploitation of blatantly synergistic racial options.
and onispawn is the best possible race for monks, and pretty close to top tier for martial PCs who can afford to get away with a charisma of 5. which consists of fighters, barbarians, rangers, and specific cavalier or samurai builds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Addressing the whole class description and its impenatrability, perhaps monks should have had orders like calaviers, each one helping describe the beliefs of the specific monk school. Something like that could have given them some direction as far as skills and fluff go. We have style feats and archetypes now, but had they started with some kind of monk orders their might have been less confusion about their purpose.
...
Monks in a prison break situation or you can't take weapons past this point area are very cool. Especially if you have a disarm monk. Bashing in faces, stealing weapons, chucking them to compadres. Very neat.
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, and if you play a fantasy system where how well you hit matters more than what you are using, there martial arts shine more brightly.
The classic problem with the monk is fighting a barb or fighter or equivalent at very low levels, if they have a greatsword and you have your hands. You get minced really quick. Your damage does not match, not even close.
The monk's unarmed improves, but they end up being like a two weapon character with very fluctuating damage.
...
Yes yes, monks can wear those boots too, and then they are even faster.
This class is better than the monk when I use a magic item, makes your argument all about the items, and not comparing classes.
A ranger beefing their speed with one of their few spells is good, but they are still slower than the monk. Terrain can really matter though, and who is better at moving through it or making the required checks. I've never seen a monk with low acrobatics or a weak jump, though.
I feel morally obligated to link this for those with monk woes.
Monk (Psionic) fixes pretty much every major problem that monks feel, provides options for countless monk themes, doesn't need tons of archetypes or hoop-jumping or specific races to function. Has been frequently used with standard 15 point buy without falling behind. It can be used for everything from venerable masters of an ancient esotetic martial art to elven assassins who use magical powers to stalk and kill their enemies.
Pretty much all the core monk features are present though most have been converted into "secrets" which are selectable class features obtained periodically throughout your career and there are other options for secrets (some of which encompass a few archetypes).
The class lacks a ki pool (because it would be redundant). Virtually everything that someone would need a ki pool for is covered by an expansive list of powers that double as choose-it-yourself class features (by selecting powers appropriate to your theme you can easily produce your perfect monk regardless of your concept).
You can find all the full details of the psionic system for free here: d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed and can purchase the book or pdf here: Psionics Unleashed Pdf, Print, or Bundle. Truly some of the best rules for 3.x/Pathfinder in existence. You can also check out Dreamscarred's website at DreamscarredPress.com.
I don't like you much, but your psionic monk is a really cool idea.
Addressing the whole class description and its impenatrability, perhaps monks should have had orders like calaviers, each one helping describe the beliefs of the specific monk school. Something like that could have given them some direction as far as skills and fluff go. We have style feats and archetypes now, but had they started with some kind of monk orders their might have been less confusion about their purpose.
Yep, each one have a different focus. This was done in 3.0 and 3.5 with monk prestige classes, but it could be more attached to the core monk.
......Yes yes, monks can wear those boots too, and then they are even faster.
This class is better than the monk when I use a magic item, makes your argument all about the items, and not comparing classes.
A ranger beefing their speed with one of their few spells is good, but they are still slower than the monk. Terrain can really matter though, and who is better at moving through it or making the required checks. I've never seen a monk with low acrobatics or a weak jump, though.
No he isn't
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
No he isn't, what?
Fast?
I wasn't talking about the barbarian, I love those fast guys, I was pointing out the speed superiority of the monk over ranger and rogue. Don't forget, for monk, it is +20 at 6 and +30 at 9.
Super fast.
Why don't they stack?
I checked your spoiler tags, I couldn't find what you meant.