I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.
Takes one to know one, so I bow to your expertise on the matter.
I've heard the claim made of core monks. It worked if you gimped the fighter to hell and back. Honestly though, I don't think the monk needs to match the fighter's DPR to be effective. But he does need more than he has.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think if the monk could move and make multiple attacks, complaints would cease...he would fully satisfy the archetype of a motile, agile damage dealer. He wouldn't have to do the most damage, because you could run around the battlefield like a demented imp and smack everything.
==Aelryinth
If you could hit it. Movement is one thing, but the monk's problems are deeper than that. It's something to consider as part of a solution though.
I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.Their opinions differ from my own. Therefore, they are jerks.
No, but implying the devs are jerks or incompetent. I’m not surprised this threads start to rift in the same direction as some of the previous monks threads where Devs bashing was used.
So you think it’s cool to imply that the devs are incompetent or that the Devs, or some of the them, are out to get the martials?
I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.Their opinions differ from my own. Therefore, they are jerks.No, but implying the devs are jerks or incompetent. I’m not surprised this threads start to rift in the same direction as some of the previous monks threads where Devs bashing was used.
So you think it’s cool to imply that the devs are incompetent or that the Devs, or some of the them, are out to get the martials?
It's implying neither to give a frank and honest opinion as to the balance issues the game faces as holdovers from the previous system. The point has been made many times that Pathfinder is more balanced than 3.5 ever was. Is it wrong to highlight continuing issues and suggest ways of improving it? I think not, and were I one of the designers I would welcome constructive criticism.
It's implying neither to give a frank and honest opinion as to the balance issues the game faces as holdovers from the previous system.I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.Their opinions differ from my own. Therefore, they are jerks.No, but implying the devs are jerks or incompetent. I’m not surprised this threads start to rift in the same direction as some of the previous monks threads where Devs bashing was used.
So you think it’s cool to imply that the devs are incompetent or that the Devs, or some of the them, are out to get the martials?
True, and I never said it was.
The point has been made many times that Pathfinder is more balanced than 3.5 ever was. Is it wrong to highlight continuing issues and suggest ways of improving it? I think not, and were I one of the designers I would welcome constructive criticism.
No, it is good and I even agree that some martial classes, especially the fighter and rogue, but also the monk to some extent and possibly the Cavalier and Samurai needs some more love.
I would like to see that monk.
BTW, AMIB already proved a Hungry Ghost monk can match the DPR of a fighter.
you rang sir:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mhpi?The-DPR-Summer-Olympics-or-What-are-we#3
I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.Their opinions differ from my own. Therefore, they are jerks.No, but implying the devs are jerks or incompetent. I’m not surprised this threads start to rift in the same direction as some of the previous monks threads where Devs bashing was used.
So you think it’s cool to imply that the devs are incompetent or that the Devs, or some of the them, are out to get the martials?
Noone implied anything even close to that. All we did was point out the flaws in the game system and suggest ways to fix to them.
Pathfinder is a great game. But it's not perfect. We only discuss its problems and possible solutions because we love the game and want it to evolve and improve as much as possible. If we didn't like PF, we'd simply play something else and not bother to post anything here.
We never said the Devs are incompetent. But they do make mistakes, just like everyone else. Even if some fanboys refuse to accept that fact.
Hell, even before the errata, there were lots of fanboys saying core Monk was a great class and that the critics simply "didn't know how to play them right", even though the developers themselves said Monks had fundamental problems!
There is no Fighter/Monk/Rogue haters here, sir, only frustrated Fighter/Monk/Rogue fans.
I get to answer two jerks in one post. Great.Their opinions differ from my own. Therefore, they are jerks.No, but implying the devs are jerks or incompetent. I’m not surprised this threads start to rift in the same direction as some of the previous monks threads where Devs bashing was used.
So you think it’s cool to imply that the devs are incompetent or that the Devs, or some of the them, are out to get the martials?
Noone implied anything even close to that. All we did was point out the flaws in the game system and suggest ways to fix to them.
Pathfinder is a great game. But it's not perfect. We only discuss its problems and possible solutions because we love the game and want it to evolve and improve as much as possible. If we didn't like PF, we'd simply play something else and not bother to post anything here.
We never said the Devs are incompetent. But they do make mistakes, just like everyone else. Even if some fanboys refuse to accept that fact.
Hell, even before the errata, there were lots of fanboys saying core Monk was a great class and that the critics simply "didn't know how to play them right", even though the developers themselves said Monks had fundamental problems!
There is no Fighter/Monk/Rogue haters here, sir, only frustrated Fighter/Monk/Rogue fans.
Cool, then we are on the same page.
What gave me a fit was the " wanted martials to suck". I must have missread them.
Noone implied anything even close to that. All we did was point out the flaws in the game system and suggest ways to fix to them.
Pathfinder is a great game. But it's not perfect. We only discuss its problems and possible solutions because we love the game and want it to evolve and improve as much as possible. If we didn't like PF, we'd simply play something else and not bother to post anything here.
We never said the Devs are incompetent. But they do make mistakes, just like everyone else. Even if some fanboys refuse to accept that fact.
But, it’s not a “flaw’ it’s a “feature”. Wizards have always been more powerful than Warrior at the top levels, and Tanks beat the puny Wizards at low levels. It’s part of D&D. It’s been part of D&D since ODD. Now sure, 3.5 made the power discrepancy worse, so much so that even at low-mid levels a optimized Spellcaster could beat anything not super-duper optimized (or BoNS), and at high levels it was just crazy.
4th Ed went too far the other way, and it’s quite unpopular. Players don’t want exact power level equivalencies or sameness.
PF fixed most of the worst excesses of 3.5. Now sure, I’d have no problem giving some of the martial classes a slight boost at the higher levels, I agree that’s not a bad idea at all. And the devs are moving that way. Look at the monk fixes. Maybe not enough, but the thought and effort is there. And, the splatbooks have not done the super-power increase like in 3.5, they are keeping a lid on it- for the most part.
I WANT some power level discrepancy. I WANT mighty warriors to beat out puny wizards at low levels (where most gaming is done anyway). I want powerful wizards be more powerful at high levels. That’s D&D, and I like to play D&D.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But, it’s not a “flaw’ it’s a “feature”. Wizards have always been more powerful than Warrior at the top levels, and Tanks beat the puny Wizards at low levels. It’s part of D&D. It’s been part of D&D since ODD. Now sure, 3.5 made the power discrepancy worse, so much so that even at low-mid levels a optimized Spellcaster could beat anything not super-duper optimized (or BoNS), and at high levels it was just crazy.
Being a feature doesn't mean it's not flawed. Neither does being old. I don't care about how 1E worked, if i wanted to play 1E, I'd play 1E.
What's the point of keeping design flaws from old editions? The idea is make the game better! Keep the good ideas, discard the bad ones, then add new ideas and do the same to them.
4th Ed went too far the other way, and it’s quite unpopular. Players don’t want exact power level equivalencies or sameness.
The problem with 4E is that all classes play the same. It's the lack of variety that hurts it, not balance. (And to be honest, it's not all that well balanced either).
Balance has no relation to sameness, unless you decide to balance tings in the worst possible way.e.g.: IMHO, Paladins, Barbarians, Inquisitors and Bards are very well balanced with one another, and they all have very different mechanics.
PF fixed most of the worst excesses of 3.5. Now sure, I’d have no problem giving some of the martial classes a slight boost at the higher levels, I agree that’s not a bad idea at all. And the devs are moving that way. Look at the monk fixes. Maybe not enough, but the thought and effort is there. And, the splatbooks have not done the super-power increase like in 3.5, they are keeping a lid on it- for the most part.
PF did improve the class balance, but I wouldn't say it solved most problems or even the worst problems. Check my older posts in this thread for a list I made about the differences between casters and martials, everything listed there is still a serious issue, IMO.
I WANT some power level discrepancy. I WANT mighty warriors to beat out puny wizards at low levels (where most gaming is done anyway). I want powerful wizards be more powerful at high levels. That’s D&D, and I like to play D&D.
Then our tastes and opinions are extremely different. I don't want to be incredibly weaker/stronger than my friend's character based solely on class choice.
I want to be able to play a high-level Rogue/Monk/whatever without being completely superfluous.I want to play a high level wizard/druid without having to gimp myself for my friends to able to actualy enjoy the game.
I would like to see that monk.
BTW, AMIB already proved a Hungry Ghost monk can match the DPR of a fighter.you rang sir:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mhpi?The-DPR-Summer-Olympics-or-What-are-we#3
Hmmm. The DPR is not too bad at ~55 per round flurrying with a temple sword, but I am pretty sure I have seen more from some fighter builds. That said, even if the DPR is comparable, the AC is awful - 23 at 10th level? Ouch! and it's not like he has huge hit points to absorb the extra hits he'll take either.
For those interested, I am now play-testing some changes of my own for the monk (not a complete re-write, just tweaks) and posting up the results here.
I would like to see that monk.
BTW, AMIB already proved a Hungry Ghost monk can match the DPR of a fighter.you rang sir:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mhpi?The-DPR-Summer-Olympics-or-What-are-we#3
Hmmm. The DPR is not too bad at ~55 per round flurrying with a temple sword, but I am pretty sure I have seen more from some fighter builds. That said, even if the DPR is comparable, the AC is awful - 23 at 10th level? Ouch! and it's not like he has huge hit points to absorb the extra hits he'll take either.
Good AC is not the point of the thread.
from the OP of that thread:
Regarding survivability, AC 22 and fort/will saves at +8 are the minimum for melee characters, barring some explanation of why the character doesn't need these things to survive. (For example, barbarians get cut some slack on AC because of their raging HP totals.)
As for the DPR, its not really 55 but:
If you'd like this in DPR terms, he does 71.55 DPR unless he hits a long run of bad luck or burns most of his ki points on non-attacking uses; his DPR drops to 64.28 if he only pops a ki point for an extra attack if one of his other attacks generates it for him. Hungry Ghosts also get Punishing Kick 10 times a day (in lieu of Stunning Fist), which despite the name is compatible with weapon attacks. Assuming Ghost!Sam is using a ki point for an extra attack and attempts a Punishing Kick on his first attack, Punishing Kick is worth 4.05 DPR against enemies with a strong (+13) fort save and 7.29 DPR against enemies with a weak (+9) fort save, due to the decreased AC from being prone. (I haven't calculated the AOO from the enemy standing up, but it would also contribute to damage.)
so on terms with a fighter.
For those interested, I am now play-testing some changes of my own for the monk (not a complete re-write, just tweaks) and posting up the results here.
I will take a look. 3b and 3c looks good.
I made a feat called rappid strike that lets (some) martials move and make two attacks with their highest base attack with a -4 penalty (-2 if you use TWF). If you are a monk you can make 2 attacks at highest flurry a -2 and burn a ki if you want.
The attack can be used with spring attack and with a charge.
Please elaborate.Magic Weapons, Armor, Cloaks of Resistance, ect ... are all item patches to a fundamental problem.NoA) I don't see a fundamental problem.
B) I like magic stuff. It let me spice up my characters.
C) Auto-scaling is boring. +1 magic weapon at level 4, +2 at level 8, +3 at level 12, etc. It is perhaps good, but it is boring.Finally again: I don't see a fundamental problem.
Obviously Fighter Types needing certain magic items to do their basic job is not a problem if that is the flavor/style of campaign that you like.
It is, however, pretty much fundamental to the system. Which is the point I was aiming for.
True, it is pretty much fundamental to the system, but I don’t find that to be a problem. I for example like the whole “stranded in the jungle” or “stranded on an island” without any items scenario.
|
Some dislike the magic item dependency from a flavor perspective. Having one's basic functionality dependant on the work of casters is quite deflating. And not everyone wants to envision their characters decked out in mismatched bling.
And then there's the matter of the monks and their ascetic flavor being something players can't reasonably pull off in a standard game.
I would like to see that monk.
BTW, AMIB already proved a Hungry Ghost monk can match the DPR of a fighter.you rang sir:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mhpi?The-DPR-Summer-Olympics-or-What-are-we#3
Hmmm. The DPR is not too bad at ~55 per round flurrying with a temple sword, but I am pretty sure I have seen more from some fighter builds. That said, even if the DPR is comparable, the AC is awful - 23 at 10th level? Ouch! and it's not like he has huge hit points to absorb the extra hits he'll take either.
would a non dex based non shield using barbarian, ranger, fighter, paladin have a much better AC?
Yes. First off, the AC is miscalculated, it should be 22 (for some reason the wisdom bonus of +4 became +5), it should be 22. Second off the monk has spent 24Kgp and one feat on protective items and a wisdom booster. One feat is easy to match, +3 plate will cost ~11Kgp, leaving 13Kgp for other items, and he already has an AC of 24. A ring and amulet take it to 26, four points better, and he has 9Kgp spare to devote to other items, like a cloak of resistance. Ranger and Barbarian would be stuck with breastplate armour, but could have better saves and need the cloak less, so they could spend more on boosting other enhancements.
So barbarian and ranger would be at least 2 points better in AC, fighter and paladin would be at least 4 points better in AC.
mage armor, wand or from caster = +2 ac.
Boost wisdom is bad? I never complain when I boost my Paladins charisma.
One protective feat?
The fighter has three protective feats, Dodge, Iron Will, Improved Iron Will. With the exception of step up all remaining feats are picked to boost damage. This means the Monk is far more versatile. Also more skills, better skills and as pointed out by AMIB
Class Abilities:
Flurry of blows
Unarmed Strike
Improved Evasion
Many others, monks get a lot of random stuff
The monk also has good saves and great CMD, it can fight even if he is disarmed and if I’m not mistaken the thread was created before UC was out.
And as pointed out before, Good AC is not the point of the thread.
Flurry uses Monk level as BAB, that includes for PA calculations.
I think Dabblers point is that if you do manage to match DPR the problem switches from subpar offense to subpar defence. All those class abilities being all over the place isn't versatility its random.mage armor, wand or from caster = +2 ac.
Boost wisdom is bad? I never complain when I boost my Paladins charisma.
One protective feat?
The fighter has three protective feats, Dodge, Iron Will, Improved Iron Will. With the exception of step up all remaining feats are picked to boost damage. This means the Monk is far more versatile. Also more skills, better skills and as pointed out by AMIB
Class Abilities:
Flurry of blows
Unarmed Strike
Improved Evasion
Many others, monks get a lot of random stuffThe monk also has good saves and great CMD, it can fight even if he is disarmed and if I’m not mistaken the thread was created before UC was out.
And as pointed out before, Good AC is not the point of the thread.
Pretty much. I mean the monk has good saves, but the paladin has better ones and better AC. You can buff the monk with mage armour, but you can buff any class the same way with effects that work better for them - they just don't need it as bad.
Look at the ranger, for example, and compared to the monk he's ahead everywhere except his Will save. He can even self-buff with his own spells without any extra investment.
Well, being beind the Paladin in saves and AC is not exactly somehing to be embarassed about. They have the best saves in the game and are probably Top 3 in AC as well. (BTW, I believe that build's +5 Wisdom bonus to AC comes from the numerical bonus Monks get added to it)
Temple swords really help Monks to reach decent DPR. So they can acally be competitive. They would be Fighers with lower AC and DPR, but more skill poins and much better saves! Their flat-footed AC is atrocious, bu they compesate for it wih a great touch AC, whether or not that is a good trade depends on what your GM likes to throw at you.
That's good enough for me!
Except... Monks still lag behind.
1st, Temple Swords are pret cool, but they're still only one weapon. Rangers, Fighters, Paladins and Cavaliers can be amazing with lots of differents weapons... Monks either get the Temple Sword or they suck.
But, let's assume every Monk has access to Temple Swords and every layer wants to use one of those.
- Monk moves: there goes his full BAB. That's anything from -1 to -5 to your attack rolls. You don't get that extra attack from Ki either.
- Monk tries to use combat maneuvers: Cool. You can use them as a standard action, so you still get full BAB... If only it was enough... Temple Swords are not Trip/Disarm weapons IIRC, so you don't add the enhancement bonus to CMB. And since you got some extra AC instead of an AoMF, your unarmed strikes won't do very well either... And let's not forget that maneuvers are not that good anyway...
- HP is still about 1 point lower per level. Probably more than that if you boost your Wisdom. And unlike Paladins, you don't get self-healing. You can't even use wands.
- What do you do against flying enemies? Shurikens have pitiful range, you don't get proficiency with bows and even if you did, you wouldn't be able to flurry with them.
- Sooner or later you get Diamond Soul. Great, you resist magic! All magic! All the time! That means you caster allies now have a 50% of being unable to buff/heal you... And the BBEG? The guy who is probably 2~3 levels above you? He doesn't have that much of a problem, since: 1) his chance to bypass your SR ir considerably higher and 2) He doesn't cast on you nearly as often as your allies do.
So, all in all, the one way to make a Monk decent is making her as non-monkish as posssible. And even then he'll still lag behind most of the time, and th gap will probably increase with level, especially if we consider the fact that flying enemies with ranged offense become more and more common.
Superstition actually provides meaningful protection against enemy spell casters, and it's the prerequisite for good powers like Witch Hunter, Ghost Rager, and the amazing Spell Sunder.
Sooner or later you get Diamond Soul. Great, you resist magic! All magic! All the time! That means you caster allies now have a 50% of being unable to...It is not all the time. It is in combat. Also, Alsmost the same happens with the superstition rage power and few people complain about it.
Just gonna jump in here for this one point. The reason Superstition isn't as maligned is because as soon as you can rage cycle you can just leave rage off as a free action when your turn ends to receive buffs and other beneficial magic. Lowering your SR is a standard action.
There are a few unfortunate things about doing this, like losing the morale bonus to Str for attacks of opportunity, but they're better than losing your standard action.
Also a Barbarian doesn't rage until his turn, so if the caster goes first and casts a buff he's not losing out on anything, meanwhile the Monk isn't benefiting from that first round Haste half the time.
at 17 level? and if you do that if you leave your rage off at the end of your turn then how is superstition helping you?
There are several options for getting rage cycling earlier than 17th level.
If you leave rage off at the end of your turn Superstition isn't helping you. But you have the option to leave it off as a free action, rather than the standard action it takes to turn off Spell Resistance.
The FF AC of the monk is not atrocious. It is not stellar either, but the bonus from wisdom and from monk levels add to FF AC.
That's odd... I've always seen the Wis bonus to AC as a Monk using his kung-fu to better evade attacks, so how does she do that if she's not aware of the threat? Anyway, no complaints.
- Monk tries to use combat maneuvers: Cool. You can use them as a standard action, so you still get full BAB... If only it was enough... Temple Swords are not Trip/Disarm weapons IIRC, so you don't add the enhancement bonus to CMB. And since you got some extra AC instead of an AoMF, your unarmed strikes won't do very well either... And let's not forget that maneuvers are not that good anyway...This is no true. There is FAQ about it, weapons add heir enhancement bonus if the weapon is used for that maneuver.
For example the temple sword add to trip/disarm/sunder and probably dirty trick.
I thinks this is not true for trip. IIRC, The "trip" weapon property only allows you to drop you wepaon if you fail your Trip attempt (awesome, huh? -.-), then, as players complained that it was too weak, one of the Devs said it also allowed you to use the weapon enhancement bonus. So no "Trip" property, no bonus to Trip. I have no idea why. Also, maneuvers aren't very reliable at mid-high levels anyway. I may be wrong, though.
- Sooner or later you get Diamond Soul. Great, you resist magic! All magic! All the time! That means you caster allies now have a 50% of being unable to...It is not all the time. It is in combat. Also, Almost the same happens with the superstition rage power and few people complain about it.
It's all the time, Monks have to lower it. Of course, that's not a problem out-of-combat, but in-combat, it's terrible.
Another thing: Barbarians have full BAB, can use armor and wile raging get a bonus to Str, Con and Saves, not to mention all sorts of cool and powerful abilities, which may or may not include Pounce.So by raging, Barbarians are already buffing themselves! And don't have to deal with Monks' MADness, pseudo-Full BAB and terrible weapon selection. They can use bows too! Adaptive bows make Barbarians great archers! OTOH,a Monk with Diamond Soul is effectively getting nerfed!
And of course, since Barbarians don't walk around raging all the time, they can delay to go after their caster friends, get some buffs and then attack the enemy. Monks will have to sacrifice their standard action every time, though.
EDIT: Oh, another thing: Barbarians get extra defense when they Rage. But Monks gain very little benefit for SR. They already have great saves, high touch AC, Evasion and a few immunities, so the SR adds very little to them and comes with a serious risk.
The FF AC of the monk is not atrocious. It is not stellar either, but the bonus from wisdom and from monk levels add to FF AC.That's odd... I've always seen the Wis bonus to AC as a Monk using his kung-fu to better evade attacks, so how does she do that if she's not aware of the threat? Anyway, no complaints.
Been like that through all of 3.5. Its like a forcefield. Being helpless or paralyzed shuts it off, but it even throws off rays when you aren't watching becuase it works on touch.
Been like that through all of 3.5. Its like a forcefield. Being helpless or paralyzed shuts it off, but it even throws off rays when you aren't watching becuase it works on touch.The FF AC of the monk is not atrocious. It is not stellar either, but the bonus from wisdom and from monk levels add to FF AC.That's odd... I've always seen the Wis bonus to AC as a Monk using his kung-fu to better evade attacks, so how does she do that if she's not aware of the threat? Anyway, no complaints.
For some reason I was convinced there was a "when you lose your Dex bonus to AC, you also lose this bonus" line somewhere in the Wisdom-to-AC description.
I must have mixed it up with some other ability.
For some reason I was convinced there was a "when you lose your Dex bonus to AC, you also lose this bonus" line somewhere in the Wisdom-to-AC description.
I must have mixed it up with some other ability.
It does have a bit about losing it under certain conditions, and by all logic it really should stop, but just pretend its a forcefield and life makes sense. I do the same thing with it all the time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is an interesting idea... Say every time they increase their Unarmed Fighting Damage?
Though my way means they don't get a +5 until Level 20...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Think of the WIS bonus as a sort of "sixth sense" going into their reflexive actions.
Kinda like Spider-sense. ;)
I think it's meant to be a bit like Uncanny Dodge...unfortunately, having been caught flat-footed as a monk a couple of times, I have to say it hurts. Your FF AC sucks, and you don't have the hit points to soak the damage from a sneak attack.
The monk's abilities have a lot of issues, quite aside from MAD, lack of enhancement, and a lot of others:
Wholeness of body - not fit for purpose. In combat it's no better than drinking a potion, out of combat it's same, and it burns valuable ki in the process.
Diamond soul - more harm than good, really.
Abundant step - how many classes have a class ability they have to take a feat to use for purpose? One, the monk.
Tongue of the Sun and the Moon - gosh, like the tongues spell, only you get it late in the game.