|
-The monk can debuff using maneuvers, a fighter is just plain better at it and you say we have not to compare monk vs fighters so I do not know here.
There was a very large thread comparing monk and fighter builds a few months ago.
Unarmed monks, without archetypes, were built and posted that matched fighters point for point.
Monks are part martial part skill monkey.
They fill neither role as a hybrid concept.
Their DPR is less than fighter, but greater than rogues.
Their Skill points are less than the rogue, but higher than the fighters.
They make great scouts. They have enough defenses that traps eventually become a non-issue to them.
They can hit hard and their defenses are hands down better than the fighter for everything BUT AC.
Most of people's ideal fixes for the fighter end up looking like a Monk with higher AC and DPR.
{quote]
This is true, still wizards, witches, magi, alchemist, rangers, inquisitors, bards are better. While cavaliers, barbarians, druids, oracles, gunslingers are at least equal.=> Skill monkey : The monk have rarely more than 3 skill points (4 for humans) per level, thanks to INT being one of its dump stats. His class list is average. His class bonuses doesn't enhance skills. So he's out.You choosing to dump INT is not a problem with the class.
The monk does not excel at skills, and here is why :
=> He needs 4 abilities high to be functional (i.e. try to reduce its weaknesses) : DEX, WIS, CON and STR. You will have to handle having good to excellent scores in those. In order to do that, in a standard array, you will have to dump AT LEAST one stat (and even then, you won't be super effective). Lets suppose the monk is human, and have 12 INT (I think there is no way to do this with 15 points, but whatever).
=> The monk has an average skill list : he has the scout list, 1 or 2 face skill (Intimidate and sense motive) and 2 knowledge (including 1 useful). He doesn't have trap things, he doesn't have the true face skills (diplomacy, bluff and disguise), he doesn't have UMD, he doesn't have knowledge... So with his list (and because he didn't dump INT he had to dump CHA), he will be likely to do scouting. ONLY scouting.
All skill monkeys can do several "roles" with their skills. The monk can manage one, with not everything needed to do so.
=> The monk doesn't have an excellent ability. He could do so by dumping his 2 unimportant stats, but if he does so, he doesn't have the skill points to invest in several skills.
Arthantos : you said a monk could have up to 7 maxed skills ? Yes he could. But what does he sacrifice to do so... ?
This is true, still wizards, witches, magi, alchemist, rangers, inquisitors, bards are better. While cavaliers, barbarians, druids, oracles, gunslingers are at least equal.
So no, the monk excel at skills.
If your definition of skill monkey is having skills, then yes, the monk is a skill monkey and everyone is. In my opinion, the monk is not very well placed among the skilled person list :
Those who are excellent at skills (i.e. skill monkeys) :
=> Alchemist (4+INT, INT as main ability, good skill list)
=> Bard (6+INT, excellent skill list, class powers that enhance skills)
=> Inquisitor (6+INT, excellent skill list, class powers that enhance skills)
=> Rogue/Ninja (8+INT, excellent skill list, class powers that enhance skills)
Those who have more skills than the monk :
=> Ranger (6+INT, average to good skill list)
=> Summoner (2+INT for itself + 6+INT for its eidolon, excellent skill list, ability to boost its skills by far with evolution)
=> With (2+INT, INT as main ability, average skill list, can cover its lack of scouting skills with spells)
=> Wizard (2+INT, INT as main ability, average to good skill list and spells for the scouting part)
Those who have the same level at skills than the monk :
=> Cavalier/Samurai (4+INT, INT as a dump stat, average skill list)
=> Gunslinger (4+INT, not that good skill list)
=> Magus (2+INT, INT as important yet not main ability, average skill list)
=> Oracle (4+INT, not that good skill list)
=> Paladin (2+INT, but its excellent CHA and its skill list makes him a very good face).
Those who are lower level at skills than the monk :
=> Barbarian (4+INT, but INT as dump, and not that good skill list)
=> Cleric (2+INT, but INT as dump. Too bad cause its list is good)
=> Druid (4+INT, but INT as dump stat, and average to bad list)
=> Fighter (2+INT, bad list)
=> Sorcerer (2+INT, bad list except for UMD, spellcraft and its knowledge)
I've never had a problem, when running a monk, in using his fast movement to get him to the weak areas of the enemy's deployment and taking them out. So, why do you?
Because my GM runs enemies intelligently and if I ever tried to run into an area, alone, to attack the "weak spot" of an enemy group my only option after a round or so would be to just LEAVE again, or die as the bastards mob me.
Kirin Style epowers Knowledge skills to increase DPR. Snake Style causes Sense Motive to increase defenses in cobat.
Here's the difference between these: Wisdom is a stat that a Monk NEEDS to function. Therefore, Sense Motive is a more attractive option as a Wis based skill. And Snake Style is a pretty versatile Style (it's my favorite thematically, second favorite mechanically after Dragon), increasing defense and having the potential to increase offense (much like Crane Style).
Kirin Style is quite limited. It is mostly only good for people who have Int as their main or secondary stat, which Monk does not have it as. Int, even if it's not a dump (I always dump Cha first before Int. I'd rather have a social misfit with some useful skills than a drooling moron who can talk to people a little better), it is a low priority stat.
It especially favors casters, since it has Kn. Arcana as a prerequisite, which most are likely to have anyway. As well, it is only likely to be useful if you have invested in all, or at least many of the monster identifying Knowledges, since it utterly relies on you being able to make a Knowledge check on them.
To be useful, this requires you to have a reasonable number of ranks to be able to make the DC (at least on a Take 10, since Kirin Path allows you to do that).
Not really feasible for a guy who, since none but Religion is on his skill list and he has Int as a low priority, would have to pump the ranks fairly high.
Nah, Kirin Style is for your Alchemists, Wizard/Eldritch Knights, Magi, and so on who can have the skill ranks necessary to make full use of it, and the semi combat focused nature to get a benefit from it (though being able to Take 10 in combat as a Swift action is still good for non-combat casters).
You know skill list has a lot to do with being a skill monkey too.
Barbars have trouble being scouts nor do they get class bonuses to jumping and they have a worse bonus to movement than the monk.
I think that Arcane Trickster is a little over.
|
|
{quote]This is true, still wizards, witches, magi, alchemist, rangers, inquisitors, bards are better. While cavaliers, barbarians, druids, oracles, gunslingers are at least equal.=> Skill monkey : The monk have rarely more than 3 skill points (4 for humans) per level, thanks to INT being one of its dump stats. His class list is average. His class bonuses doesn't enhance skills. So he's out.You choosing to dump INT is not a problem with the class.
The monk does not excel at skills, and here is why :
=> He needs 4 abilities high to be functional (i.e. try to reduce its weaknesses) : DEX, WIS, CON and STR. You will have to handle having good to excellent scores in those. In order to do that, in a standard array, you will have to dump AT LEAST one stat (and even then, you won't be super effective). Lets suppose the monk is human, and have 12 INT (I think there is no way to do this with 15 points, but whatever).
I don't have to be better, being on equal terms with half with classes in the game is sufficient
Having 4 or 5 really good skills in more than sufficient to contribute meaningfully out of combat, or even in combat depending on the skill. Having 6 or more is just gravy for a class that was never meant to compete with the rogue or bard in the skill department.
Yes, but "contribute meaningfully out of combat" isn't what is in question here (unlike with the Fighter).
It's that somebody said that the Monk is a SKILL MONKEY.
Which is completely untrue.
He does aight out of combat. Not a skill monkey though.
It's in combat he has trouble, sort of. His abilities are just so not complementary to each other it's ridiculous.
moving...And attacking once for pitiful amage? A barbarian is better skirmisher with a decent speed and pounce.
As for -staying- in the middle of an enemy group round after round, clearly, if the monk is targetting weak spots in the enemy's deployment, then he's not usually sticking round after round in one spot behind enemy lines. He's moving around behind enemy lines and jumping back and forth over the line of skirmish.
barbarian is indeed a better skirmisher
speed is good enough to qualify, not excessive, but useful enough
pounce
higher STR
more HP
with traits, they can have similar acrobatics or stealth
able to afford more int due to reduced MAD
not required to be an Onispawn Variant tiefling or not required to Possess Mythic Tiers to be effective
can use any weapon they please effectively, not just a temple sword or with archetypes, a composite longbow
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Barbarian's speed is greater than average. That doesn't make it decent for skirmishing except in the rounds immediately after he drops an enemy.
Also, if the monk chooses his targets intelligently, he can usually manage "round 1: close in, attack, round 2: full attack, round 3: get out" without a sweat
The usefulness of which is almost nil.
Also, experience is not cumulative, by the by.
Saying "The people at my table have 120 years of combined experience!" is like saying if I start a company and work with 29 other people for a year my company has "30 years of experience" doing their job.
It doesn't work that way.
|
|
Also, if the monk chooses his targets intelligently, he can usually manage "round 1: close in, attack, round 2: full attack, round 3: get out" without a sweatTo be able to do that you need a couple of things. First good damage otherwise the monster will ignore you. An good AC/CMD/SAves/Hit points to survive one or two rounds in melee.
If you are so secure the monk can math those requisites post a build.
It's been done.
Tell you what:Post your target numbers at level 10, standard WBL, PFS rules, and post your fighter that meets them.
No extra conditions, no changing the numbers later.
It's been done.
When? I remember seeing a buncha cool builds for Monks FULL ATTACKING in the other thread, but none that made a viable skirmisher.
Yeah, we've got 120 players at my table *eyeroll*
I didn't say you did.
But unless you, yourself, are over 120 years old and somehow brought D&D from the future when you were younger, you do not have 120 years of experience playing this game.
can use any weapon they please effectively, not just a temple sword or with archetypes, a composite longbowThat archetype with the longbow.
It has full martial proficiency.
Flurry with a Polearm.
that would be the Sohei
the Sohei, Zen Archer, Martial Artist, Quinggong, and Master of Many Styles are the big 5 archetypes. the Archetypes the monk depends on to be Viable.
the Sohei has to be 12th level to flurry with both polearms and longbows, and 6th level to flurry with just one of the two.
at 18th level, they gain the ability to flurry with 3 weapon groups, but they have no bonus archery feats, and have to multiclass to get a mount because they don't get their own mount, just the ability to continue another classes mount progression.
The Barbarian is going to be facing off against the enemy brute. If Conan needs to get to the pointy hatted target on the enemy's back line, then he either 1.) has to receive an AoO from the enemy brute or 2.) make an acrobatics roll and make a half move (the monk's half move is probably greater than the Barbarian's half move by a lot), or 3.) make an acrobatics roll at -10. He *might* be able to fly if he's got access to that magic and, more significantly, flight is possible in the environmentmoving...And attacking once for pitiful amage? A barbarian is better skirmisher with a decent speed and pounce.
As for -staying- in the middle of an enemy group round after round, clearly, if the monk is targetting weak spots in the enemy's deployment, then he's not usually sticking round after round in one spot behind enemy lines. He's moving around behind enemy lines and jumping back and forth over the line of skirmish.barbarian is indeed a better skirmisher
speed is good enough to qualify, not excessive, but useful enough
pounce
higher STR
more HP
with traits, they can have similar acrobatics or stealth
able to afford more int due to reduced MAD
not required to be an Onispawn Variant tiefling or not required to Possess Mythic Tiers to be effective
can use any weapon they please effectively, not just a temple sword or with archetypes, a composite longbow
before you get haste, most foes die in one lucky swing in most cases anyway
an when you do get haste, the barbarian is faster than the monk until 12th level when they break even
and your scenario assumes the barbarian starts next to the enemy brute
Barbarian pounces enemy caster, after Archer slaughters enemy brute for me, after the allied arcanist casts haste and after the allied divine caster helps the allied archer mop up the brute.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What an ignorant comparison. Its like you posting a fighter and then arguing that a wizard posted must hit all those target numbers in order to be proven not to be weaker than the fighter. Monks and Fighters are different classes.
You're right, the fighter is better in combat (not even trying), can afford better INT and if with traits, can become as skilled as the monk, while still being much better in combat than a monk.
If you want to compare the monk to a real part martial part skill monkey, talk to the Ranger. Similar skill list, more skill points, better in combat, and above that, it got spells.
The paladin have little less skill points, a lesser skill list (but more useful out of combat IMHO), is much more useful in combat and out of combat. Oh, and it have its abilities (useful ones) and spells.
The barbarian have similar skill points and skill list, much more power in combat (without rage, and even more with that). Oh, and he got pounce ! With a weapon that actually DOES damage its foes.
What does the monk have ? Defenses. But defenses neither does win encounters nor it does give an advantage for non-combat situations.
Which page in the rule book is 'martial' defined?
:rolleyes:
The definition is a player construct, yes.
This does not mean it is invalid.
The designation of martial or caster (with some adding skill monkey as a third category) is well defined by the community, and most use similar definitions, though there may be some mild disagreement as to whether Ranger or Paladin are casters or not (I personally do not consider them as such, their spellcasting is very limited and is mostly based around combat buffs).
Generally a martial is a character expected to be involved directly in combat as a damage dealer, or on occasion a "damage setter upper" (grapple/trip/etc. builds) who can still deal a decent amount of damage.
A caster is a character who casts spells as one of their primary roles.
A skill monkey is a character mainly focused on their skills as their main focus.
And the vast majority of classes fall into one of these roles, and some as hybrids of two.
Wizards, Sorcerers, Witches, Clerics, Oracles, and Druids are casters. In a lesser sense, so are Bards (hybrid skill monkey) and Magi (hybrid martial).
Barbarians, Anti/Paladins, Fighters, Cavaliers/Samurai, and Gunslingers are martials. Damage is their main deal, though most of them have at least SOME baked in out of combat ability (Ranger is kind of a hybrid skill monkey/martial class).
Rogues/Ninjas are the only class(es) that have skills as their main focus (though Ninja is closer to a hybrid/martial, if not quite there IMO), with Summoner closer to a caster/skill monkey, as well as the Alchemist and Inquisitor being a weird (but cool, and balanced) mix of all 3.
The Monk, however, defies classification. He only has as many skills as some of the full martials (Barbarian, Gunslinger, Cavalier/Samurai), so he's not a skill monkey. He's not a caster (even Qinggong Monk at BEST gives him some limited combat buffing ability, much like a Ranger or Paladin).
So that leaves martial. However, according to you he's not this either. So what's his niche?
The Monk is not a Ranger, Alchemist, Magus, or Inquisitor. His standard for accceptance should not be for him to make as good a Ranger, Alchemist, Magus, or Inquisitor as someone who is actually those classes.
This isn't 4th ed. Roles are not tied to classes. If you want a strong hard line (and there's no need to have one if you play a hit and run game - the lesson the Brits learned in the US Revolutionary War), then you can have a wizard cast a wall or an illusion or dominate the enemy or summon or any of a number of options.Ok then, post the monk build (10th or 12th level) that do several things (besides runing fast) better than a barbarian(or ranger or alchemist, magi or inquisitor) or of the same level.
I will argue than the inquisotr is better at scouting, figthing and overall utility.
a Monk, lets see what they have
very few skill points, so skills aren't their niche
no spellcasting, so they clearly cannot be a caster
no decent ranged weaponry short of 2 ranged archetypes, so they cannot be ranged damage dealers
lets see what that leaves
Melee DPS
Tank
with their lack of synergy, they have to prioritize making their choice of being a squishy DPS that dies in one turn, or being an unyielding wall that cannot fight back.
something that is fixed by an optional rule called mythic tiers
but few people play with mythic tiers anyway
The monk has speed, poison immunity, the ability to strike as adamantium, ki powers, stunning fist, an easier time getting style feats, and a lot more
What does the monk have ? Defenses. But defenses neither does win encounters nor it does give an advantage for non-combat situations.
let me point you to the ranger
bonus combat style feats without prerequisites
+4 weapon or adamantium weapon
spells
more skills
neutralize poison
large pouncing pet
good fortitude save
more HP
better feat selection
|
|
that would be the Sohei
the Sohei, Zen Archer, Martial Artist, Quinggong, and Master of Many Styles are the big 5 archetypes. the Archetypes the monk depends on to be Viable.
the Sohei has to be 12th level to flurry with both polearms and longbows, and 6th level to flurry with just one of the two.
at 18th level, they gain the ability to flurry with 3 weapon groups, but they have no bonus archery feats, and have to multiclass to get a mount because they don't get their own mount, just the ability to continue another classes mount progression.
The blanket statement was monks suck, fighters are better.
The challenge posted was: you post a fighter, I'll post a monk.
I won't tell you how to build the fighter if you don't tell me how to build my monk.
If all you care about is damage, play a barbarian, a class that is severely overpowered.
The monk has speed, poison immunity, the ability to strike as adamantium, ki powers, stunning fist, an easier time getting style feats, and a lot more
What does the monk have ? Defenses. But defenses neither does win encounters nor it does give an advantage for non-combat situations.Yes they have several abilities,and those abilities do not combine to make a good class.
Being diferent does not made them less bad as they are (except for several archetypes as note above)-
my issue with the class is the designers built them around being naked and unarmed, but so many superior options outshine being naked and unarmed, and monk accesses none of them.
|
|
my issue with the class is the designers built them around being naked and unarmed, but so many superior options outshine being naked and unarmed, and monk accesses none of them.
Incorrect
Even the baseline monk can flurry with two-handed weapons.
He has no need to do so past the early levels, but it is an option.