Why do people keep saying monks are underpowered?


Advice

651 to 700 of 1,168 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>

Kyaaadaa wrote:
My Monk (currently never felled) has the highest AC of our Elven Paladin (who hits the deck almost every fight) and Dwarf Fighter (who tanks with his face), so "fragile" is speculative. "But the GM hits the Fighter/Paladin because they deal the damage." He stopped swinging at me when he found out he couldn't hit me.

How's the WBL looking for those guys? I'm betting they are severely behind if you are way ahead on AC.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
Anyone can flank, but the Fighter is usually in the mix deep enough the Rogue/Ninja doesn't want to be near it, what with Alchemist explosions, Fireballs and baddy Cleaves going off. Monk and Rogue tag teams to pick off strays require two bodies, and no Arcane or Divine caster is going to take the Monk's place in the mess. No, Monk doesn't pull anything special, except the flank wasn't possible without him. And before someone says "The Rogue should just go in after the Fighter to flank with him." Most DMs eat alive anything squishy in the melee, so as soon as the Rogue gets in range, he'd be mauled before his next turn. Its what I would do as a DM.

Wait, you're saying a divine cleric can't come into melee? What is he busy doing? Casting heals all the time? He can wear full-plate for crying out loud. And most DMs go after squishy things in melee? Yeah, that'd be the monk!

Kyaaadaa wrote:
Druid Animal companions are easily my second target for every baddy and his brother. Squish. Right after wizard familiars. Oh please do send him to attack.

Please post your monk, I'd love to see what a powerhouse he is. Also, I want to see if an equal level druid animal companion can equal him for combat effectiveness.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
I understand the frustration. I wish I had a 200+ DPR on my Monk with 300 HP and an AC of 50 too. If you don't want to play Monk in favor for something else, go for it. But I've never ever seen a Monk who enters combat and does absolutely nothing for 15 rounds, which seems to be the over all view of how Monks play.

We aren't saying the monk does nothing for 15 rounds. We are saying that almost any other martialish class could do the same thing the monk did in those rounds, and have done it better.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
I understand the frustration. I wish I had a 200+ DPR on my Monk with 300 HP and an AC of 50 too.

Way to utterly f%@#ing miss the point there, champ.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
If you don't want to play Monk in favor for something else, go for it. But I've never ever seen a Monk who enters combat and does absolutely nothing for 15 rounds, which seems to be the over all view of how Monks play.

No, the overall view is that the Monk brings nothing to the table that another class can't do, and do better. His main upsides are: He runs fast (whoopdeedo), he has good saves (so does the Paladin) and...he can flank?

Your argument is "He'snot supposed to be a fighter!" and then you go on to say he's SUPPOSED to be something he's even LESS CUT OUT FOR.

The class doesn't have to be literally unplayable to be far below the expected power level of any other class besides the poor, almost useless Rogue.


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
strayshift wrote:

Also, without diverting the thread, very few DM's will allow a pc monk to get a good shot at grappling a BBG Wizard. It's as rare as hen's teeth that a DM will let you do it without some defence intervening so it definitely falls into the 'Don't get your hopes up about doing this anytime soon' category of character abilities. Yes, you might get to grapple his underlings but don't expect to win a key fight with it.

Yet another reason to pay something else.

and even then

the BBEG wizard's concentration modifier is likely so much higher than the Monk's CMB, that they can afford the cast while grappled. due to both having a higher level, and due to having a much higher intellect than any stat the monk has. plus combat casting and focused mind, make concentration even easier.

no way that monk is getting a 20 STR or 20 DEX

Wizard can easily get a 20 int

and with all the resources the monk invests on Dex/Con/Str/Wis

the wizard can get away with Int/Con/Dex for a lot cheaper, has a much higher starting Int than the monk's offensive stat. it is easier to augment concentration than unarmed CMB,

and due to the Higher Con, derived from less MAD, and the ability to dump 3 entire stats, STR, WIS, and CHA. the wizard has a lot more hit points than the monk, plus a lot of the wizard's other available defenses are much better than armor class at negating both attacks and manuevers.

Grapple the wizard? you just have to roll a 50% miss chance to see if you eliminate one of his 8 mirror images. in other words, a 1 in 18 chance of landing a grapple. and that is with both mirror image and displacement. both low level spells a wizard can afford to have up in multiple fights by 10th level. more in the case of a BBEG who doesn't care about resources.

I'll ignore the Mirror Image and Displacement arguement, since that affects everyone, not just Monks.

Monk MAD issues are flaws everyone is familiar with, and they won't be going away. However, I usually don't pump STR or CON, opting for DEX and WIS instead, and dropping CHA.

As for Grappling wizards in the first place, they're only a d4 HD. Flurry the schmuck until he's face first and move on. With high DEX and WIS, a Monk's Touch AC is much higher than a Fighter in plate, and with Evasion Fireballs/Lightning Bolts are a laugh. Except for the universal protections wizards can put on themselves, Monks are more equipped to deal with them than other classes are.

P.S. Someone bring up Ranged attacks against flying Wizards, that will be a fun one to debunk.


Kyaaadaa wrote:

I'll ignore the Mirror Image and Displacement arguement, since that affects everyone, not just Monks.

Monk MAD issues are flaws everyone is familiar with, and they won't be going away. However, I usually don't pump STR or CON, opting for DEX and WIS instead, and dropping CHA.

As for Grappling wizards in the first place, they're only a d4 HD. Flurry the schmuck until he's face first and move on. With high DEX and WIS, a Monk's Touch AC is much higher than a Fighter in plate, and with Evasion Fireballs/Lightning Bolts are a laugh. Except for the universal protections wizards can put on themselves, Monks are more equipped to deal with them than other classes are.

P.S. Someone bring up Ranged attacks against flying Wizards, that will be a fun one to debunk.

Did you miss the memo? Wizards get a full d6 now.

Flurry him? I'm more curious how you got next to him for a full round to pull off a flurry. If he can fly, he could just withdraw and go up up and away. Or if he is a conjurer wizard, use his limited shift ability to get out of your face. Also, if he is blasting, he is a stupid wizard (generally).

What about ranged attacks against flying wizards? Pop a wind wall, stay behind it. You're good.


Kyaaadaa wrote:

My Monk (currently never felled) has the highest AC of our Elven Paladin (who hits the deck almost every fight) and Dwarf Fighter (who tanks with his face), so "fragile" is speculative. "But the GM hits the Fighter/Paladin because they deal the damage." He stopped swinging at me when he found out he couldn't hit me.

Anyone can flank, but the Fighter is usually in the mix deep enough the Rogue/Ninja doesn't want to be near it, what with Alchemist explosions, Fireballs and baddy Cleaves going off. Monk and Rogue tag teams to pick off strays require two bodies, and no Arcane or Divine caster is going to take the Monk's place in the mess. No, Monk doesn't pull anything special, except the flank wasn't possible without him. And before someone says "The Rogue should just go in after the Fighter to flank with him." Most DMs eat alive anything squishy in the melee, so as soon as the Rogue gets in range, he'd be mauled before his next turn. Its what I would do as a DM.

Druid Animal companions are easily my second target for every baddy and his brother. Squish. Right after wizard familiars. Oh please do send him to attack.

I understand the frustration. I wish I had a 200+ DPR on my Monk with 300 HP and an AC of 50 too. If you don't want to play Monk in favor for something else, go for it. But I've never ever seen a Monk who enters combat and does absolutely nothing for 15 rounds, which seems to be the over all view of how Monks play

your monk effectively contributed nothing another PC couldn't do better.

because your monk had amazing defenses and poor offenses, he ignored you and went straight for the paladin and the fighter.

plus the paladin was a freaking elf, you know that elves have a constitution penalty? do you not? was the paladin a new player who didn't realize he could heal himself as a swift action? was the paladin poorly built

the fighter was a dwarf, a respectable defensive choice, but apparently, like the paladin, the fighter was also likely poorly built.

both of these builds were clearly glass cannons

and because they were doing the damage, the enemies couldn't hit the monk, and the monk had poor offense.

the foes are like, "lets gang up on the elf and the dwarf. they look like easy prey."

and your monk only survived because he contributed nothing that anybody else couldn't contribute.

in fact, i would have rather had an animal companion or an eidolon than your monk.


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Kyaaadaa wrote:

My Monk (currently never felled) has the highest AC of our Elven Paladin (who hits the deck almost every fight) and Dwarf Fighter (who tanks with his face), so "fragile" is speculative. "But the GM hits the Fighter/Paladin because they deal the damage." He stopped swinging at me when he found out he couldn't hit me.

Anyone can flank, but the Fighter is usually in the mix deep enough the Rogue/Ninja doesn't want to be near it, what with Alchemist explosions, Fireballs and baddy Cleaves going off. Monk and Rogue tag teams to pick off strays require two bodies, and no Arcane or Divine caster is going to take the Monk's place in the mess. No, Monk doesn't pull anything special, except the flank wasn't possible without him. And before someone says "The Rogue should just go in after the Fighter to flank with him." Most DMs eat alive anything squishy in the melee, so as soon as the Rogue gets in range, he'd be mauled before his next turn. Its what I would do as a DM.

Druid Animal companions are easily my second target for every baddy and his brother. Squish. Right after wizard familiars. Oh please do send him to attack.

I understand the frustration. I wish I had a 200+ DPR on my Monk with 300 HP and an AC of 50 too. If you don't want to play Monk in favor for something else, go for it. But I've never ever seen a Monk who enters combat and does absolutely nothing for 15 rounds, which seems to be the over all view of how Monks play

your monk effectively contributed nothing another PC couldn't do better.

because your monk had amazing defenses and poor offenses, he ignored you and went straight for the paladin and the fighter.

plus the paladin was a freaking elf, you know that elves have a constitution penalty? do you not? was the paladin a new player who didn't realize he could heal himself as a swift action? was the paladin poorly built

the fighter was a dwarf, a respectable defensive choice, but apparently, like the paladin, the fighter was also likely poorly built....

I like this one. "You didn't system master, so your whole party is full of fail."


Well, that's not fair.

Eidolons can have lolwtfBBQ AC AND a good damage out put WITH REACH.

Eidolons ARE the Summoner class for the most part. They don't really compare to Animal Companions.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
I like this one. "You didn't system master, so your whole party is full of fail."

Would you mind posting your monk, and/or the paladin/fighter as well?

You're argument is basically saying that by god if the wizard wants to be the front-line combatant, he can and he will be benefiting everyone by flanking and possibly doing some extra damage to things!

It is assumed you will use abilities you have (like lay on hands) to at least some level of effectiveness. If you are the only one being effective, it is likely a failure of the players of the other characters, not of the abilities those characters have.


Tarantula wrote:
Did you miss the memo? Wizards get a full d6 now.

Forgive that slip, only been playing Pathfinder for a little bit, still a 3.5 player at heart. But 1 more HP average per HD? I'd still cave his skull in. And yet to see an argument against Monks vs Wizards that isn't 100% accountable to every other DD class out there.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
Did you miss the memo? Wizards get a full d6 now.
Forgive that slip, only been playing Pathfinder for a little bit, still a 3.5 player at heart. But 1 more HP average per HD? I'd still cave his skull in. And yet to see an argument against Monks vs Wizards that isn't 100% accountable to every other DD class out there.

Displacement slows everybody down equally. Unless you can ignore miss chance. (Improved precise shot typically).

Mirror image slows everybody down, but the fighter/ranger is likely to pop an image every hit. You might miss enough on the last couple swings to not even do that.

Flying, the fighter can pull a bow and be almost as good. You can flurry with some shurikens, and if you are melee focused, you probably have no ranged feats at all, while fighters/rangers can spare a couple.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
I like this one. "You didn't system master, so your whole party is full of fail."

you don't need a very high level of system mastery to know that elves make poor paladins.

can you show us the builds for your monk that can somehow outtank a paladin and a fighter?

some of us really want to pick it apart, do a bit of reverse engineering and find out what makes it tick.


Tarantula wrote:
Kyaaadaa wrote:
I like this one. "You didn't system master, so your whole party is full of fail."

Would you mind posting your monk, and/or the paladin/fighter as well?

You're argument is basically saying that by god if the wizard wants to be the front-line combatant, he can and he will be benefiting everyone by flanking and possibly doing some extra damage to things!

It is assumed you will use abilities you have (like lay on hands) to at least some level of effectiveness. If you are the only one being effective, it is likely a failure of the players of the other characters, not of the abilities those characters have.

I didn't say I'm the only one being effective, but I'm not playing my Monk as a pure DD. I lead the charge, eating up AoO before parking myself usually by the enemy spellcasters/archers/cleric, and let the Pally/Fighter go in. By the first swings, most enemies miss me, and focus on the easier to hit fighters or go straight for the mages.\

And no. I'm saying the Monk, with more HP and higher AC than the wizard, should be the one benefiting everyone else by flanking and doing his damage. And no, I'm not saying that Monks are the only class able to do this, pointing out that they can, and are good at it. Pets, Rogues and such doing the same tend to get smashed easier when they attempt it, and if the Fighter is playing that role, they're really not tanking and tactics are going floppy.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
I didn't say I'm the only one being effective, but I'm not playing my Monk as a pure DD. I lead the charge, eating up AoO before parking myself usually by the enemy spellcasters/archers/cleric, and let the Pally/Fighter go in. By the first swings, most enemies miss me, and focus on the easier to hit fighters or go straight for the mages.

You say this, what I see is, "I charge in, a few monsters swing and miss, and I do a little bit of damage. Some of the other bad guys swing at me, and can't hit, but I am not a threat to them either, so they focus on the ones who are doing damage. The rest of the fight, I provide a flank for the ones doing damage, increasing their potential marginally, while still being mediocre myself."

Kyaaadaa wrote:
And no. I'm saying the Monk, with more HP and higher AC than the wizard, should be the one benefiting everyone else by flanking and doing his damage. And no, I'm not saying that Monks are the only class able to do this, pointing out that they can, and are good at it. Pets, Rogues and such doing the same tend to get smashed easier when they attempt it, and if the Fighter is playing that role, they're really not tanking and tactics are going floppy.

Great, monks have more HP/AC than a wizard. How about everyone else that is a "good" flanker? "Good" because I do not think monk's are a good flanker. Either their AC is high enough, but damage isn't, or vice versa. Rogue/Ranger/Fighter/Pally/Animal Companion (somewhat expendable, only takes 24 hours to replace) can all do that role, and do it better than the monk.

Again I'll ask... can you post the monk? I want to see how you have found the exact perfect AC/HP/Damage potential sweet spot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm just sayin' but "More HP and higher AC than the complete noncombatant class" isn't a compliment in the slightest.

Also, I like the spell False Life.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
Kyaaadaa wrote:
I like this one. "You didn't system master, so your whole party is full of fail."

Would you mind posting your monk, and/or the paladin/fighter as well?

You're argument is basically saying that by god if the wizard wants to be the front-line combatant, he can and he will be benefiting everyone by flanking and possibly doing some extra damage to things!

It is assumed you will use abilities you have (like lay on hands) to at least some level of effectiveness. If you are the only one being effective, it is likely a failure of the players of the other characters, not of the abilities those characters have.

I didn't say I'm the only one being effective, but I'm not playing my Monk as a pure DD. I lead the charge, eating up AoO before parking myself usually by the enemy spellcasters/archers/cleric, and let the Pally/Fighter go in. By the first swings, most enemies miss me, and focus on the easier to hit fighters or go straight for the mages.\

And no. I'm saying the Monk, with more HP and higher AC than the wizard, should be the one benefiting everyone else by flanking and doing his damage. And no, I'm not saying that Monks are the only class able to do this, pointing out that they can, and are good at it. Pets, Rogues and such doing the same tend to get smashed easier when they attempt it, and if the Fighter is playing that role, they're really not tanking and tactics are going floppy.

Monk? More HP than the Wizard?

D8 Vs D6 is only 1 HP per level.

while you can dump Cha and Maybe Int, you have to Pump Str Dex Con and Wis to be effective. but you personally said you neglect Str and Con in favor of Dex/Wis

Wizard, can afford to neglect Str/Wis/Cha without hindering his primary functions, while maxing out Wis and having a passable Dex and a lot More Con than your monk who didn't pump Con. 2 more Con gives the wizard Equal HP to your monk, 4 More or even 6 More con, depending on the resources the wizard invests compared to your monk, leads to a hit point or 2 per level above him, and the BBEG wizard has more levels, putting HP in his favor

plus the BBEG wizard can easily have mirror image and displacement, which a fighter, ranger, or barbarian can drop an image with every attack, your monk might not be as successful

your monk's poor damage requires an obscure splatbook enchantment to solve. an enchantment that eats into your enhancement boni, and your wealth.

if you fight unarmed, try struggling to both acquire an agile amulet of mighty fists, and bypassing DR with the darned thing.


I've participated in these threads over and over and tried (though I'll admit boorishly and failing) to defend monks. Here's my question. To the monk haters... what are you guys trying to get out of flaw picking Monks? The end result being no one ever plays Monks again? All your rage will make Paizo change Monks even though they were built in 3.5 this way, possibly giving an automatic 18 in STR and WIS? Are people ranting just to rant? I don't know what the masses are hoping to gain other than trolling on a weak class. Enlighten me. I've pointed out Monk's strong points, which were undermined and I got "other classes have those too so Monk sucks." and "they have nothing original and specific to themselves, which makes them worse than the other classes."

What change(s) can anyone make to build them up? Put a solution to all these problems.


Did I post Post #666? Bwah ha ha!


Kyaaadaa wrote:
To the monk haters...

If I hated Monks I wouldn't care enough to post about them being UP.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
what are you guys trying to get out of flaw picking Monks?

That hopefully, one day, the devs will actually pay attention to what the actual problems with the class are for once and try to fix them instead of sticking a Hello Kitty band-aid over the gaping gut wound in the class.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
possibly giving an automatic 18 in STR and WIS?

Seriously? I mean, I do know you're ignoring me (and a lot of other people in this thread) but you could at least try to PRETEND you'd paid attention to ANYTHING in the last, what, 14 pages?

Kyaaadaa wrote:
I've pointed out Monk's strong points

No you haven't.

You've pointed out that your Monk (with no build in sight) somehow nebulously "does better" than the Paladin and Fighter (also no builds in sight) by being able to NOT get hit and this put enemy attention off of the useless guy who knows how to dodge and onto them.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
which were undermined and I got "other classes have those too so Monk sucks."

Ohhh, you're still talking about the whole "Monks can flank, that makes them good!" nonsense, I see.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
What change(s) can anyone make to build them up? Put a solution to all these problems.

There's a lot of ways to fix 'em.

Mostly by tightening their focus and making them actually good at something instead of mediocre to bad at everything.

Make 'em a combat class: Give them Full BaB/D10 HD, don't limit them to using Two Weapon Fighting to be effective. Reduce MADness by either making Wis do more or Dex do less. As-is you NEED Wis and Dex and then a whole bunch of magic items to have a credible AC, and by that point you've neglected Str for damage and to-hit, making you useless in combat. Strip out the extremely situational and nigh useless abilities, along with the outright harmful ones, and replace them with fewer good ones. Tonge of the Sun and Moon, Slow Fall, High Jump, Diamond Soul, etc.

Make 'em a non-combat focused class: Change them to a 6 level caster and give them a decent spell list based on self-buffing and support for combat. Exchange their nigh useless abilities for ones that help teammates. Ashiel's Psionic Monk thing is a good example for this but that'd never be an official fix because Paizo doesn't like spell points.

Well they don't like the Monk either but this is optimistic thinking.

Hell, make TWO classes, one a combat martial artist and one a Zen Mystic or whatever that buffs and helps people out. Do this at the same time you combine the Fighter and Rogue (sort of, I've elaborated elsewhere) to fix them and you even keep the same number of classes.


Kyaaadaa wrote:

I've participated in these threads over and over and tried (though I'll admit boorishly and failing) to defend monks. Here's my question. To the monk haters... what are you guys trying to get out of flaw picking Monks? The end result being no one ever plays Monks again? All your rage will make Paizo change Monks even though they were built in 3.5 this way, possibly giving an automatic 18 in STR and WIS? Are people ranting just to rant? I don't know what the masses are hoping to gain other than trolling on a weak class. Enlighten me. I've pointed out Monk's strong points, which were undermined and I got "other classes have those too so Monk sucks." and "they have nothing original and specific to themselves, which makes them worse than the other classes."

What change(s) can anyone make to build them up? Put a solution to all these problems.

If we can convince the community the Monk is a weak core class what will happen? The community will express their displeasure with a crappy class, the likely end result is that paizo will look at that displeasure and consider "Hey maybe if we release a book called Monastic Awesomepossumness, consisting of a series of feats, items, archetypes(replacing the abilities everyone knows sucks on the monk), and enhancement bonus abilities, and maybe errata the AoMF to be able to stack up to +5 flat and +5 extras like every other weapon, which allow monks to avoid the MAD mess that is their life people will probably buy it because clearly they want Monks to not suck or they wouldn't b+!&& about it so much!"


Kyaaadaa wrote:

I've participated in these threads over and over and tried (though I'll admit boorishly and failing) to defend monks. Here's my question. To the monk haters... what are you guys trying to get out of flaw picking Monks? The end result being no one ever plays Monks again? All your rage will make Paizo change Monks even though they were built in 3.5 this way, possibly giving an automatic 18 in STR and WIS? Are people ranting just to rant? I don't know what the masses are hoping to gain other than trolling on a weak class. Enlighten me. I've pointed out Monk's strong points, which were undermined and I got "other classes have those too so Monk sucks." and "they have nothing original and specific to themselves, which makes them worse than the other classes."

What change(s) can anyone make to build them up? Put a solution to all these problems.

It's a fair question - my entire point right back to the beginning of this thread is that the other party members carry the monk (simularly in Pathfinder the rogue also), now thats fine to a degree but when your other party members chances of survival are reduced because someone wants to pursue an option that requires the other players support then the other players have a right to voice their views on that choice (at least they can in the groups I play in).

The monk is inferior in combat to other martial classes in my opinion for a number of reasons these threads have gone over (I play principally low level games with limited access to magic so I don't engage in these 'build-wars'). My examples come from game-play, with experienced players and DM's (so Mages being prepared against grapple is expected not malicious). I have yet to see a monk, other than a Zen Archer, realistically contribute on a consistent basis in a party.

I don't hate Monks, I more pity them as a class, and if you are making my fighter's job harder because you insist on playing a character that can't contribute very much to fights then I will point this out to you.


Rynjin wrote:

There's a lot of ways to fix 'em.

Mostly by tightening their focus and making them actually good at something instead of mediocre to bad at everything.

Make 'em a combat class: Give them Full BaB/D10 HD, don't limit them to using Two Weapon Fighting to be effective. Reduce MADness by either making Wis do more or Dex do less. As-is you NEED Wis and Dex and then a whole bunch of magic items to have a credible AC, and by that point you've neglected Str for damage and to-hit, making you useless in combat. Strip out the extremely situational and nigh useless abilities, along with the outright harmful ones, and replace them with fewer good ones. Tonge of the Sun and Moon, Slow Fall, High Jump, Diamond Soul, etc.

Make 'em a non-combat focused class: Change them to a 6 level caster and give them a decent spell list based on self-buffing and support for combat. Exchange their nigh useless abilities for ones that help teammates. Ashiel's Psionic Monk thing is a good example for this but that'd never be an official fix because Paizo doesn't like spell points.

Well they don't like the Monk either but this is optimistic thinking.

Hell, make TWO classes, one a combat martial artist and one a Zen Mystic or whatever that buffs and helps people out. Do this at the same time you combine the Fighter and Rogue (sort of, I've elaborated elsewhere) to fix them and you even keep the same number of classes.

A note to all "These <x> classes are better."

Did the class exist before Monk was written in 3.0 D&D?

If the answer is no, then you have a power creep, and it would be obvious why Monk fell down the ladder. A LOT of classes used in the previous posts fall into this catagory, including every single one of Paizo's creations.

As for changing what DEX and WIS does, this would cause catastrophic gameplay issues since it would upheave everything about every class, re-prioritizing all the stats for every class across the board. If you meant "for Monk only", that is possible, but also wouldn't make sense, since Monks are styled off the Shaolin Monks, who favor Strength, Wisdom, Dexterity, Constitution and to an extent Intelligence. Obviously this is a challenge to a system that refuses to allow such extremes.

And for Paizo hating Monks: they didn't make the Monk as is, they copy/pasted it from 3.0/3.5 D&D. Not changing them shows lack of creativity and laziness, not a hatred toward them.


Oh, and as for solutions, the general consensus is that some archetypes are playable, I'll go with that - why play a 'standard' monk when you can play a Quiggong Monk?


Kyaaadaa wrote:


A note to all "These <x> classes are better."
Did the class exist before Monk was written in 3.0 D&D?

If the answer is no, then you have a power creep, and it would be obvious why Monk fell down the ladder. A LOT of classes used in the previous posts fall into this catagory, including every single one of Paizo's creations.

Except every single class in the game (including the Monk) was boosted and remade for Pathfinder.

Pathfinder is not 3.0. You do not use 3.0 as the baseline to determine power creep for Pathfinder. You use Pathfinder as the baseline to determine power creep for Pathfinder.

And the Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian are not somehow more powerful than the Monk because of power creep. They're better because they were made that way for THIS game.

Even if other classes released later and are more powerful than the Monk that does not constitute power creep. Power creep implies that something is stronger than the baseline assumptions of the game. Power Creep does NOT imply that something newly released is stronger than a weaker option previously released.

In short: You're using the phrase wrong. Stoppit.

Kyaaadaa wrote:
As for changing what DEX and WIS does, this would cause catastrophic gameplay issues since it would upheave everything about every class, re-prioritizing all the stats for every class across the board. If you meant "for Monk only", that is possible, but also wouldn't make sense, since Monks are styled off the Shaolin Monks, who favor Strength, Wisdom, Dexterity, Constitution and to an extent Intelligence. Obviously this is a challenge to a system that refuses to allow such extremes.

So what you're saying is the fluff should limit the mechanics?

That's bad game design. Scrap that idea.


strayshift wrote:
Oh, and as for solutions, the general consensus is that some archetypes are playable, I'll go with that - why play a 'standard' monk when you can play a Quiggong Monk?

I go with that too. Zen Archer is nifty also. MoMS for free style feats as a couple level dip, especially for Duelist ramp up.


@wraithstrike (and whoever else does actual analysis)

I think my submission does fairly well for an unarchetyped monk.


LoreKeeper wrote:

@wraithstrike (and whoever else does actual analysis)

I think my submission does fairly well for an unarchetyped monk.

Decent level 1 is always good 15 AC and 13 hp is in line.

Action economy on drinking potions isn't great but since it's the equivalent of just having fobbed off slow fall for barkskin as a qinggong I'll ignore that. AC is okay not great although if you could stack all the buffs on it's in line with your level. DPR is a little on the low side but your damage per hit is high enough to have a good option when fighting things with DR and the twohand strike from tiger style does give you a good option if you're really having issues with DR.

Tiger pounce gives you decent sticking(although no option against flight, ddoor, or similar non withdraw actions. You have relatively low ki points compared to other builds thus far so using the extra ki attack is going to be something you're very thrift with particularly if you had the qinggong barkskin taking up 2 ki points a day.

Overall not bad, but at the same time not really awe inspiring. Probably the best unarmed monk I've seen in the thread thus far but ideally someone with more experience with monks could fact check it to make sure everything adds up.

Edit: My biggest issue would be from levels 2-5 or so he's going to be a little too easy to hit since most of your core AC items are relatively expensive compared to buying armor.


LoreKeeper wrote:

@wraithstrike (and whoever else does actual analysis)

I think my submission does fairly well for an unarchetyped monk.

I would still argue for a 10th level character the hit points and chances to hit leave something to be desired.

Liberty's Edge

MrSin wrote:
ciretose wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
I mean like what part about that in particular are you referring to. You were kinda vague before.
It was that people don't seem to realize a poison doesn't always just hit you once and then you deal with it after combat if the cleric memorized the right spell.
Jason said its expected to carry around a few scrolls to help that out, or even a wand! Wands and scrolls are great for things you expect to use once in a long while or often with no DC.

And when you have to stop mid combat to use a move and standard action, that is a loss of an action.

Liberty's Edge

Since no one else did it, DPR on the 10th level core only monk I posted earlier, which still has spring attack

Reg = 37.95
PA = 43.89

Reg w/Ki = 49.5
Reg PA w Ki = 57.75

Chance of stun vs high save is = 19.0%
Chance of stun vs low save is = 32.8%

Chance of stun on a charge vs high save is = 20%
Chance of stun on a charge vs low save is = 36%

11 Ki a day.

CR 10 Creatures have 130 HP, so the monk is hitting his 1/4 of total hitpoints in a single round (Which is my measure) both with regular and power attack.

The +2 AoMF get through some of the basic DR, since that came up. And I don't think a 1 in 5 shot of stunning is bad (particularly when it could be fatigued or sickened.


The monk is a ridiculously good mage tank. Their saves and class features are basically an F-you to spell casters. Their movement speed is an F-you to DDing casters. And even though grapple is generally bad, a monk will rip a caster to pieces with it.

Paladins may have good says, but they don't have an evasion, immunity to poison and disease (paladins only have disease), SR, and an extra bonus to will saves against enchantments.


gnomersy wrote:

Overall not bad, but at the same time not really awe inspiring. Probably the best unarmed monk I've seen in the thread thus far but ideally someone with more experience with monks could fact check it to make sure everything adds up.

Edit: My biggest issue would be from levels 2-5 or so he's going to be a little too easy to hit since most of your core AC items are relatively expensive compared to buying armor.

Thanks. I agree it is not bad; considering it is an un-archetyped monk. The way I play him, from level 1, is frequent purchase of potions of mage armor. They are the go-to item for a low level monk in my opinion, and at 50gp also very affordable. (Which also means his level 1 AC, is 15, and 19 after potion. Not spectacular, but pretty good at level 1.)

strayshift wrote:
I would still argue for a 10th level character the hit points and chances to hit leave something to be desired.

This is balanced against the (many) attacks the character has. Considering that haste (and the stacking ki attack) are not included, that is fairly decent. The build actually under-values damage output: a slight re-arrangement of items purchased would make for a +2 amulet (instead of +1) which would increase the power attack flurry to 16/16/11/11 2d6+15. The feat "Weapon Focus" would be a recommendation at level 11 (it just isn't available earlier in this build). With archetypes or multiclassing a lot more options come available. 1 level of Fighter at level 1 would make a very big difference to the feat economy of the build, and subsequently the DPR.

But the intention was to create a "pure" monk without any such tricks. The expected DPR is not fabulous - but it is acceptable. And very much upwardly open. By changing to Improved Critical at level 10 and using the +2 amulet, the expected DPR increases to 51. And the character at this point has many potential options to increase DPR that are not included (allied spells, flanking, haste, ki attack, etc). Just using a ki attack increases expected DPR to 66.5. This cannot be used that often, but is a significant contribution in combat. Assuming haste and ki attack this increases to 89.5.

Alternatively, ignoring haste and ki attack, but adding 1 level of fighter at level 1 (Weapon Focus) increases the expected DPR to 55.5 (with +2 amulet and improved crit); and 97 with haste and ki attack.


Marthkus wrote:

The monk is a ridiculously good mage tank. Their saves and class features are basically an F-you to spell casters. Their movement speed is an F-you to DDing casters. And even though grapple is generally bad, a monk will rip a caster to pieces with it.

Paladins may have good says, but they don't have an evasion, immunity to poison and disease (paladins only have disease), SR, and an extra bonus to will saves against enchantments.

Woots! Someone else gets it!

inb4: "but other classes can do it too", "being good at one thing doesn't make them good", "they're not good at anything else, and barely good at this one thing"


But they are only good 'mage tanks' if they can physically access said mage - hence the earlier point about most DM's not letting you near enough to grapple, an archer is a bigger threat to a mage in my experience.


Going to post my monk since someone asked me to. Currently level 6, though the end result is going to be 8 MoMS, 3 FHF, 9 Duelist.

Monk 4/Fighter 2

STR: 11
DEX: 20 (18+2 for human)
CON: 10
INT: 16
WIS: 18
CHA: 8

To clarify: DM did not, obviously, use the 20 point buy system, thankfully, since that system is weak.

Feats: Snapping Turtle Style (a horrible decision in hind-sight, should have first went with, and did pick up Crane Style, but since this was my first Pathfinder Monk, its was a lesson learned)
Dodge
Mobility
Improved Initiative
Combat Expertise
Crane Style
Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Wakizashi (my future Duelist piercing weapon)

Traits: Exile (+2 Initiative) and Suspicious (+1 Sense Motive)

In possession of an Amulet of Natural Armor +1 and Bracer's of Armor +3.

My standing AC is 25. Fighting Defensively puts me at 29. Combat Expertise puts me at 31.

He does have his flaw in that he doesn't hit hard, which I knew when I made him. He wasn't meant to, though I know that sounds like complete lunacy to DPR fanatics. We have a Fighter and a Paladin for that. This guy eats up AoO allowing those two to get at whoever they want, and then buddies with the Rogue so he can Sneak Attack strays. If all the melee enemies are playing happily with the two front-liners, then I go after the spell casters. My touch AC is incredibly hard to hit for a wizard, and while an 8 Reflex save isn't overly high for a 6th level character, its no slouch either. I eat spellcasters, and have consistently. My only downfall currently is if I'm caught Flat-footed since my AC is almost entirely Dodge. That rarely happens.

My feat progression is going to continue with style feats, going for Panther and Snake. End result is a Dervish of two attacks against every foe who AoO me when I run past, and beasting 1v1.

Scarab Sages

strayshift wrote:
But they are only good 'mage tanks' if they can physically access said mage - hence the earlier point about most DM's not letting you near enough to grapple, an archer is a bigger threat to a mage in my experience.

This is where the move speed and jump bonus comes into to play. Unless the caster has fly, a core monk should be able to reach the mage, even if they have to go through occupied squares to do so.

Even if Fly is a factor, a careless caster who is staying just above melee range may be able to be grabbed with a Ki jump.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
strayshift wrote:
But they are only good 'mage tanks' if they can physically access said mage - hence the earlier point about most DM's not letting you near enough to grapple, an archer is a bigger threat to a mage in my experience.

Oh good, I knew someone would bring this up.

Mages have access to so many spells to hamper and frustrate archers that Archer vs Wizard is a complete one-sided slaughter in favor of the arcane. Wind Wall, Obscuring Mist, Protection from Arrows, Sleet Storm, Resilient Sphere, Wall of Force, Wall of Stone, and on and on. 3.5 is even worse, spells that reflect arrows back to the archer, reflect them at the archer's allies, make them explode on the archer after release. WotC was no fool, and neither is Paizo. Archer's are the obvious mage killers, so mages have access to plenty of resources to frustrate them. On top of that, most archers are Rangers or Fighters, with a few Paladins sprinkled in. Aside from the Pallys, both Rangers and Fighters have crap Will Saves. Hold Person, Suggestion, Sleep, all those wonderful "F U" enchantment spells to knock the front liners right out work on the archers. Not so much with the Monk who gets a decent Will save, has WIS as a useful stat, and +2 to Enchantment bonus ability at 3rd level.


Imbicatus wrote:
strayshift wrote:
But they are only good 'mage tanks' if they can physically access said mage - hence the earlier point about most DM's not letting you near enough to grapple, an archer is a bigger threat to a mage in my experience.

This is where the move speed and jump bonus comes into to play. Unless the caster has fly, a core monk should be able to reach the mage, even if they have to go through occupied squares to do so.

Even if Fly is a factor, a careless caster who is staying just above melee range may be able to be grabbed with a Ki jump.

Not to mention that few wizard fights take place in the outdoors. Wizards are stereotypically fought in their sanctum, with a ceiling overhead restricting their height. +20 Acrobatics and the ability to perform standing jumps as though they ran 20 feet makes grabbing and flooring those flying wizards rather easy. What? 3d6 points of fall damage? Oh monks get Slow Fall too. Guess that's just for the enemy wizard. Try that again, free damage is always fun.


This is the start of the archive, we might end up doing a contest in another thread. There's a lot of level 8 and 10 monks, so I'll list both.

PCs should be 8th or 10th level, 20 point buy, and not use archetypes. We currently have a large collection of monks, but there's only been a few competitors (fighters only) and all of them used archetypes, so none are currently listed here.

Level 8
Unnamed monk by The Big Dog
Unnamed monk by Tarantula
Unnamed monk by Ciretose
"Monk1", dwarf monk by Wraithstrike
Kondor the Wand Monk by EldonG
Unnamed monk by Dilvias
----

Level 10
----
Unnamed monk by Lorekeeper
Brother Brian by John F
Humphrey by Tarantula
Unnamed monk by Ciretose

Monsters
---
List of CR 7 through 9, collected by Tarantula:

CR 7

aboleth, air elemental (huge), black dragon (young), black pudding, brass dragon (young), bulette, chimera, chuul, dire bear, dracolisk, drider, earth elemental (huge), elasmosaurus, elephant, fire elemental (huge), flesh golem, ghost, greater barghest, hill giant, invisible stalker, lillend, medusa, nymph, remorhaz, shadow demon, shaitan, spectre, stegosaurus, succubus, water elemental (huge)

CR 8

behir, copper dragon (young), dark naga, dire tiger, efreeti, erinyes, giant octopus, giant slug, gorgon, greater shadow, green dragon (young), intellect devourer, mohrg, nabasu, ogre mage, sphinx, stone giant, treant, triceratops

CR 9

air elemental (greater), blue dragon (young), bone devil, bronze dragon (young), dire crocodile, dire shark, dragon turtle, earth elemental (greater), fire elemental (greater), frost giant, giant squid, marid, mastodon, nessian warhound, night hag, roc, spirit naga, tyrannosaurus, vampire, vrock, water elemental (greater)

Other Classes

Now looking for competitors. Fighters and rangers make pretty good competitors. No archetypes though.

----
Level 8

Level 10


Kinda late, but here is my contribution to the core 8th level monk build challenge.

Spoiler:

Human (Dual Talent) Monk
str 17 (22), dex 14, con 14, int 10, wis 17 (20), cha 7

Feats:
1st: Improved Unarmed attack*, Dodge*, Crane Style
2nd: Deflect Arrows*
3rd: Weapon Focus (Unarmed)
4th: +1 str
5th: Crane Wing
6th: Improved Grapple*
7th: Crane Riposte
8th: +1 wis

Skills: Acrobatics +13, Perception +16, Stealth +13, Sense Motive +16

Traits: +1 to unarmed damage, +2 Initiative

33,000 gp in Equipment: Belt of giant strength +4 (16k), Headband of inspired wisdom +2 (4k), 2 Quick Runner's Shirts (2k), amulet of mighty fists +1 (4k), cloak of resistance +2 (4k), ring of protection +1 (2k), 15 potions of mage armor (.75k), 250 gp in gear

Unarmed Strikes (flurry) while fighting defensively +13/+13/+8/+8 (+13 when riposting as well) for 1d10+8

AC: 29 (+2 dex, +1 dodge, +5 wis, +2 monk bonus, +1 deflection, +4 fighting defensively, +4 mage armor potion), can completely negate one melee and one ranged hit per round

Saves: Fort +10, Ref +10, Will +13 (+15 vs enchantment)

Monk abilities: stunning fist 8/day (DC 19 vs fort or be stunned 1 round, sickened for 1 minute or fatigued), evasion, move 50', maneuver training, still mind, Ki pool (9 points), slow fall, high jump, purity of body, wholeness of body

With the quick runner's shirt, he can get into position quickly while still flurrying, and while AC 29 is very good, he still doesn't mind being hit at least once so his riposte can fire. 1d10+8, while not the greatest damage in the world, is still decent, and when faced with a high DR target is still a good grappler. He also has 9 ki points, which means he can get in that extra attack, or give himself +4 AC easier, or at the end of the day can heal himself (if he was even hit) to save the cleric spells for someone else.


Kyaaadaa wrote:
strayshift wrote:
But they are only good 'mage tanks' if they can physically access said mage - hence the earlier point about most DM's not letting you near enough to grapple, an archer is a bigger threat to a mage in my experience.

Oh good, I knew someone would bring this up.

Mages have access to so many spells to hamper and frustrate archers that Archer vs Wizard is a complete one-sided slaughter in favor of the arcane. Wind Wall, Obscuring Mist, Protection from Arrows, Sleet Storm, Resilient Sphere, Wall of Force, Wall of Stone, and on and on. 3.5 is even worse, spells that reflect arrows back to the archer, reflect them at the archer's allies, make them explode on the archer after release. WotC was no fool, and neither is Paizo. Archer's are the obvious mage killers, so mages have access to plenty of resources to frustrate them. On top of that, most archers are Rangers or Fighters, with a few Paladins sprinkled in. Aside from the Pallys, both Rangers and Fighters have crap Will Saves. Hold Person, Suggestion, Sleep, all those wonderful "F U" enchantment spells to knock the front liners right out work on the archers. Not so much with the Monk who gets a decent Will save, has WIS as a useful stat, and +2 to Enchantment bonus ability at 3rd level.

I didn't say they were the ULTIMATE threat just MORE of a threat. A lot of the mage options depend on the power level of the game.

Scarab Sages

Kyaaadaa wrote:

Going to post my monk since someone asked me to. Currently level 6, though the end result is going to be 8 MoMS, 3 FHF, 9 Duelist.

Monk 4/Fighter 2

STR: 11
DEX: 20 (18+2 for human)
CON: 10
INT: 16
WIS: 18
CHA: 8

To clarify: DM did not, obviously, use the 20 point buy system, thankfully, since that system is weak.

Feats: Snapping Turtle Style (a horrible decision in hind-sight, should have first went with, and did pick up Crane Style, but since this was my first Pathfinder Monk, its was a lesson learned)
Dodge
Mobility
Improved Initiative
Combat Expertise
Crane Style
Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Wakizashi (my future Duelist piercing weapon)

Traits: Exile (+2 Initiative) and Suspicious (+1 Sense Motive)

In possession of an Amulet of Natural Armor +1 and Bracer's of Armor +3.

My standing AC is 25. Fighting Defensively puts me at 29. Combat Expertise puts me at 31.

He does have his flaw in that he doesn't hit hard, which I knew when I made him. He wasn't meant to, though I know that sounds like complete lunacy to DPR fanatics. We have a Fighter and a Paladin for that. This guy eats up AoO allowing those two to get at whoever they want, and then buddies with the Rogue so he can Sneak Attack strays. If all the melee enemies are playing happily with the two front-liners, then I go after the spell casters. My touch AC is incredibly hard to hit for a wizard, and while an 8 Reflex save isn't overly high for a 6th level character, its no slouch either. I eat spellcasters, and have consistently. My only downfall currently is if I'm caught Flat-footed since my AC is almost entirely Dodge. That rarely happens.

My feat progression is going to continue with style feats, going for Panther and Snake. End result is a Dervish of two attacks against every foe who AoO me when I run past, and beasting 1v1.

This is pretty similar to a build idea I have, but instead of going MoMS, I was going to go Martial Artist with Boar Style to to change Unarmed Strike to Piercing to use with Duelist. I lose the AoO tricks, but get extra bleed damage and will add Medusa's Wrath to add extra attacks with the demoralize bonus.


Funny how this thread turned into a build contest for 'core-only' monks (although for some reason non-core feats are allowed).

I would think that the fact that most monk archetypes are more powerful than the core monk proves that paizo is aware of the fact that the core monk isn't that great, so they made a lot of cool archetypes that allow you to do the things they want a monk to be able to do.

Discarding all those archetypes and then yelling "paizo, monks suck, do something about it" is pretty stupid in my opinion. And I don't just mean sohei and zen archer - a martial artist or even simple qinggong monk gives the unarmed monk that little bit extra (to hit in case of the martial artist, AC for the qinggong through barkskin) that he needs to be a credible unarmed combatant. Either of those two archetypes plus dragon style and dragon ferocity is all the unarmed monk needs to deliver decent damage, imo.


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:


Monk? More HP than the Wizard?

D8 Vs D6 is only 1 HP per level.

while you can dump Cha and Maybe Int, you have to Pump Str Dex Con and Wis to be effective. but you personally said you neglect Str and Con in favor of Dex/Wis

Wizard, can afford to neglect Str/Wis/Cha without hindering his primary functions, while maxing out Wis and having a passable Dex and a lot More Con than your monk who didn't pump Con. 2 more Con gives the wizard Equal HP to your monk, 4 More or even 6 More con, depending on the resources the wizard invests...

6 more Con on the wizard is hyperbole. That assumes that a monk PC only has a 10 Con which is highly problematic. I get that monks are MAD, but so are any melee 3/4 BAB with a casting attribute. I also don't think your average wizard is going to dump all their mental stats (save Int) so they can have something like an 18 Con/18 Int. They need Dex, Cha, and Wis if they want to not be hit by touch attacks, be able to work charm spells, and fend off enemy enchantments (high Will save is good, but with WIs its better).

Can you make wizard with more HP than anyone but a fighter? sure. But that is a specific combat build that loses out in a lot of other areas.


The only 'fix' monks have for their poor BAB is flurry and flurry uses the poor TWF mechanics. You need a round to get into melee and if they then stay stationary you get to make a full attack. This is the exact same thing that makes any and all TWF builds relatively vulnerable since 3.5. The only way to fix this is to get pounce or 'free' movement actions.

On top of that come other problems for the monk. You have a lower HD than other martial classes, you will need to invest more resources (gold, daily spells, feats) into getting your defense up when compared to the other martial classes and then still you're not 'better'. It is in this 'better' that the discussion always comes to a screeching halt.

I'm sure the monk players can at least agree with me that the TWF and flurry mechanics are cumbersome AND that they force you into a certain role and playstyle -> you need to get in and stick to your target. But none of your class features encourage/reward you for doing so. That's the core flaw of the monk. The design and abilities are all over the place and an approach like the ranger's weapon-styles might be a possible fix for this.


Krass Kargoth wrote:


I'm sure the monk players can at least agree with me that the TWF and flurry mechanics are cumbersome AND that they force you into a certain role and playstyle -> you need to get in and stick to your target. But none of your class features encourage/reward you for doing so. That's the core flaw of the monk. The design and abilities are all over the place and an approach like the ranger's weapon-styles might be a possible fix for this.

That's kind of a neat idea. There could be a "style" that compliments each of the Attribute concentrations that people make (Dex monk, Strength monk, Wisdom monk), giving them more flavored mechanics.

Scarab Sages

It's a better fix than adding Psionics, that's for sure. I think he core issue is that monks should be a Full BAB class. Flurry should just be an option to get more attacks, not required to get a full BAB bonus. This impacts feat selection, prestige classes, and so on. It also makes no sense that a monk is less accurate if they only make one attack per round. Monk levels should also automatically qualify for any fighter feats when used with Unarmed Strike or Monk weapons, not only when using specific archetypes.


Monks already get 'to pick' abilities, but they're still tied to you being a TWF fighter. There are archetypes that forsake TWF yes, but the discussion at hand seems to be what's up with the core monk, and a simple solution would be to go the ranger route with the styles available for the monk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I added full BAB to the monk long ago. Now, two APs later, we still find the monk to be weaker than most other full on combatants (especially paladins, who stomp on the monk even in his "forte"), but at least playable. Also gave him d10 hp.

Did the same with the rogue. Full BAB and d10.

So far, I see no real problems. The players have used this to ease up on the min/max of stats in order to overcome design weaknesses. Been a while since I saw a character with multiple negatives. Which is kinda cool.


Rynjin wrote:

There's a lot of ways to fix 'em.

Mostly by tightening their focus and making them actually good at something instead of mediocre to bad at everything.

Make 'em a combat class: Give them Full BaB/D10 HD, don't limit them to using Two Weapon Fighting to be effective. Reduce MADness by either making Wis do more or Dex do less. As-is you NEED Wis and Dex and then a whole bunch of magic items to have a credible AC, and by that point you've neglected Str for damage and to-hit, making you useless in combat. Strip out the extremely situational and nigh useless abilities, along with the outright harmful ones, and replace them with fewer good ones. Tonge of the Sun and Moon, Slow Fall, High Jump, Diamond Soul, etc.

Make 'em a non-combat focused class: Change them to a 6 level caster and give them a decent spell list based on self-buffing and support for combat. Exchange their nigh useless abilities for ones that help teammates. Ashiel's Psionic Monk thing is a good example for this but that'd never be an official fix because Paizo doesn't like spell points.

Well they don't like the Monk either but this is optimistic thinking.

Hell, make TWO classes, one a combat martial artist and one a Zen Mystic or whatever that buffs and helps people out. Do this at the same time you combine the Fighter and Rogue (sort of, I've elaborated elsewhere) to fix them and you even keep the same number of classes.

Why not let the player choose between 3 or 4 abilities when they level up.

In fact, for the debuffers give options similar to 3.5 monk feats:
1. Freezing the Life Blood: Uses a Stunning fist attempt, humanoids are paralyzed 1d4+1 rd (save DC same as Stunning Fist), but deal no damage.
2. Pain Touch: Improves Stunning Fist so nauseated 1 rd after being stunned.
3. Weakening Touch: Uses Stunning fist attempt, deal no damage, -6 penalty to Str (no save though)
4. Falling Star Strike: Blinds humanoids, 1 rd per level, Stunning Fist DC.

Of course, they'd write their own words. Because you can't copywrite concepts which is how Snake Style feat was okay'd even though it was from ToB.


@Kyaaadaa

I find it a little strange that your monk does not have Weapon Finesse.

If the character is from a private campaign, maybe your GM will allow the retraining rules from Ultimate Campaign to change the unwanted style feat?

651 to 700 of 1,168 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why do people keep saying monks are underpowered? All Messageboards