What are those good archetypes?Zen Archers take advantage of the overwhelming superiority of ranged combat.
Maneuver Masters have done very well at debilitating enemies so they cannot harm the party.
Masters of Many Styles are good with the right choices as Crane Style can make you an excellent blocker.
The last two have trouble actually finishing a fight without someone else to deal the damage for them however.
Though Maneuver Masters still have trouble fighting monsters as they get bigger and omg super strong.
Monks can do well against mostly humanoids and casters, but unless you know that's the campaign you're going into, you'll be hitting a rock wall with maneuvers on monstrous opponents.
Why do monks suck? Well this is a long difficult question that... Oh wait, its locked in two weapon fighting, can't wear armor, and is highly dependent on magic items? That's... not good. Some of his archetypes are far better, but I think I'll just touch the vanilla monk.
1. MAD. The monk is MAD. He wants good strength, he wants good dexterity, he wants good wisdom, he wants good constitution. He doesn't want mediocre stats in any of those 4, he wants good stats. Without good strength his hits don't do damage(5 attacks with D8 -2 in an encounter I was once in, led to a lot of non lethal damage). Without good dexterity his reflex and AC suffers. Without good wisdom his monk abilities won't have a great DC(they all target fort, a good save for other frontliners), and he's dependent on it for a scaling AC that's supposed to somehow keep up with the other martials(this, oddly enough, leads to some crazy high monk AC builds, but those usually are a massive cost of DPR). He wants good constitution for health, like everyone else. He has a D8 HD and is a front liner.
2. Unarmed. The Monk specializes in fighting unarmed. You can fight with a single weapon now, and that's great, but if I play a monk I really wanted to use my fist. To enchant this I need an AoMF, which has a dozen issues of its own. Alternatively, I can depend on a friend for magic fang, which isn't a real solution inherent in the class. Bypassing DR is an issue because the fist only do certain damage types, and even though the monk gives particular damage types to his fist they just don't work for every situation.
3. Unarmored. You get wisdom to AC, this is great. You get a scaling AC, this is great! At level 10, this a +2. If you have 18 wisdom you have as much as a breastplate. Yes, you suffer no ACP, but its actually easy to get +0 to acp in a breastplate. You can wear another slotted magic item to raise your enhancement bonus like everyone else. That's another slot to take up. You have no max dex, but your spread out so much its hard to raise it so high. Other classes have choices, but the monk is really locked into being unarmored or he loses class features. He can't even use a shield of any sort without losing class features.
4. Class features! You get a lot of them. How many of them are useful? Well... Not that many actually. You move faster, but that's not that great because your traveling in a group. You get a +2 to saves to a specific school of magic. You a ki pool your expected to use to keep up, rather than as a bonus. You get immunity to diseases and poisons, but your saves are all good anyway, and by the level you do you have access to cures. Diamond soul is Spell Resistance, but spell resistance can keep you from being buffed, and its scaling is almost always in favor of enemy casters. You get tongues and cease to age, but only at 17th level when other people have easy access to magics and not aging doesn't usually come into play beyond RP. You get a lot of mobility, but none that lets you move and attack. Flying is just better than being able to jump really high. You get evasion and are probably going to dodge about every AoE, but that's one of the few good abilities.
5. Flurry of Blows. Free 2 weapon fighting at full BAB is great! However you still take the -2 penalty, and you have almost no way to raise your to hit in class. Your spread out, so your likely to have lower to hit. Your only way to get magical enhancements is with the AoMF if your unarmed, but to optimize you have to rely on a temple sword or such. Its a mixed bag. However the bigger issue is that without it...
6. You have 3/4 BAB. Full BAB(2wf) if you full attack, but you have 3/4 BAB. This means for feat prerequisites you don't get to look forward to many of the awesome things barbarians or fighters get. You get full BAB with maneuvers, so you might use those, but you aren't any better at using them than anyone else. You get bonus feats, and if you want to you can spend those on maneuvers, which is nice, but maneuvers have a slew of issues of their own. Many foes are just outright immune, and again, your MAD and not going to have that super high strength to pull them all off. You don't get any inherent bonuses to them to make it up, or even the ability to use them without provoking. You just get bonus feats and full BAB with them, which brings you kinda up to everyone else. You may not want to use those feats on maneuvers. You also just don't get that many bonus feats, nor is the selection a large and amazing list.
|
In comparison, any newer player with a fighter/barbarian typically comes in swinging nicely and doing their fair share of havok.... you actually have to work to make a Fighter/Barb not good.By this expectation, anybody not rocking an 18+ strength, power attack and a two-handed weapon is under performing.
The hyperbole doesn't help.
A well built monk has little difficulty showing up to his very first PFS game with a 20+ AC. Damage is only sub-par if you set your minimum expectations to "enraged barbarian with a two-handed weapon + power attack."
I wouldn't mind seeing those first level calculations for a monk with 20+ AC. The very best I can do is a dual-talent monk with 18 Dexterity and 18 Wisdom — with middling stats everywhere else of course — who has also taken Dodge and Weapon Finesse for an AC of 19. If you're talking about using a wand of mage armour, then I'll expect you to mention that, along with the fact that he can't get one of those until at least his second session, and the fact that he now needs to invest one of his skill ranks in UMD. It should be mentioned also that this 'well built' monk is going to enjoy being absolutely irrelevant in combat.
I wouldn't say I "have a problem with" this either. I just think it's an interesting effect that is difficult to notice, but easy to see once it's pointed out. I think it partially explains why so many players seem to go through a "monk phase".So, a difficult to play class attracts beginning players.I don't really have a problem with this. If a newb player asks about monks I'll suggest an alternative class, if he's new to the game and mechanics. If he's determined to find his own path and make his own mistakes, I'll cheer him on. Mistakes are a major part of how we learn.
I do have a problem with it. Traps are bad. It's ok to have complicated, difficult seeming things that require experience and mastery to work well. It's something else entirely to have something that looks simple, straightforward and effective wind up being very difficult to make work.
Sure, if you've got an experience, cooperative GM he can point the new player in another direction, but if that doesn't happen it's just frustrating.It's bad game design. If the class came with warning flags as "Advanced, difficult to master", then it wouldn't be so bad, but it doesn't. And the game design shouldn't assume the GM will provide them.
Pathfinder, being an offshoot of D&D, never really went through a "beginner" stage. However, if you look at the Pathfinder Beginner Box you'll see that the four characters given are: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, & Wizard. Notably, no Monk.
|
|
I can do a monk with 20+ AC 1st level easily; if you take into account buying a wand of mage armor with 2 PP/750 GP. The question always is "Why? Why should I be a monk over the full-BAB Melees".
I don't think it's "all about" combat. But in combat, you need to do your role well. So if you're doing damage and don't do very much, or if you are CMB based and aren't hyper-focused a la Lore Warden, expect to start being awful.
And where's all of these things that monks DO well? They have better saves than a fighter, as a Save lover I'm all about that. Then... what? Rangers are going to outshine them in battle and are better sneaky / skill-monkeys (especially when magic is taken into account). No class is less likely to have social skills; min-max or not, you have to keep low cha/int just to have a chance with a monk being relevant. So they're not this "amazing if you don't care about combat" machine like some rogue/bard/ninja-types are. They're strictly combat based, and pretty awful at it without severe shinanigans.
Rangers get lots of feats early and lots of skills. Fighters get better AC without trying and do far more damage. Paladins have better saves and defenses, and have the ultimate evil-BBEG kill switch. Monks... are a mismatched match of skills and a cool concept that never comes to fruition, and they don't have one place where you can say another class wouldn't have done it better.
It's worth noting that although AC is the most common defense - and the one at which the monk is the weakest - the monk has a definite edge over the big, bad ranger/barbarian crowd when it's time to oppose foes that are engaging the other defenses - touch AC, CMD or saving throws.
Barbarians actually have good saving throws and touch AC if they take the superstitious line. It may very well overtake the monk's in places. The monk also still only has 3/4 BAB towards his CMD, he does however get his wisdom to it, and a feat can change that if I remember correctly.
It's worth noting that although AC is the most common defense - and the one at which the monk is the weakest - the monk has a definite edge over the big, bad ranger/barbarian crowd when it's time to oppose foes that are engaging the other defenses - touch AC, CMD or saving throws.Barbarians actually have good saving throws and touch AC if they take the superstitious line. It may very well overtake the monk's in places. The monk also still only has 3/4 BAB towards his CMD, he does however get his wisdom to it, and a feat can change that if I remember correctly.
His Wis mod is also likely to come close to, if not all the way to making up for 3/4 BAB
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They don't have better CMDs; in fact thanks to lower Str they probably have worse. Touch ACs will be up by Wis modifier; 3-4. That's good, but it's not very much, and is REALLY stretching to find an advantage.
I like monk as 1 level splash for the Manuever Master bonus on anything that likes to trip/grapple (CMB-crowders), but the 2nd level is unjustifyable in most circumstances (the 5th is unjustifyable in all circumstances).
And let's compare the dragon warrior-8 to the Shieldmaster Ranger-8
He wields a +4 heavy shield (same price as a +2 amulet of mighty fist). Shield Master lets that bonus count towards both AC and attack.
His attack is +8 level +4 shield +6 str (18 + 2 level +2 item) -3 Power Attack, for a total of +15/+10. He deals d8+22 per hit, and with his Breastplate of Agility +1 and a 14 Dex has (conservatively, without counting the other items that mimic the monk he has on) an AC of 22 (probably 27 if we give him credit for the same magic items as the monk). He averages 2 extra hp @ 1st level, 1 each additional level.
Better damage, to hit, etc. Gets a free Bull rush with each hit. Oh, and out of combat he has 2 extra skill points and more "class skills" (in addition to survival/perception bonuses). He longstriders to keep up with speed of the monk, and has a bevvy of support spells.
What exactly is the monk doing better than him? Probably +2-3 on Touch AC, +3 on Will saves, and that's about the extent of his advantages.
|
So what are the go-to archetypes for making a STR-based melee monk? (One who's not the "maneuver to set everyone else up" style that's already been mentioned.)Anyone?
Qinggong maybe? I like Monk of the Sacred Mountain too.
I have a prototype here that I've only tested in one game.
Wow 67 posts and no one has mentioned the item slot problem monks have.
I did, but only a little bit in a spoiler.
Not with the recent change allowing a single weapon to be used for flurry. That basically gives you TWF like a full martial class only investing in a single weapon.They last as long as it takes for the DM to realise that to all intents and purposes he can just ignore the monk.They sit right beside the threads complaining about the monk being overpowered.
The overpowered monk thread tend to pop up whenever a DM realizes there is no effective way to damage a well built monk without wiping the rest of the party.
Yes, provided you can find a decent temple sword (the only passable weapon the monk has, they don't get any good ones and most suck) or have one crafted, this works for a strength based monk, but in that case AC-sucks and the DM doesn't have this problem. And no, the single-weapon flurry isn't really all that good because the monk still has his other problems.
For unarmed, I don't completely disagree, although the clarification about bonuses applying to DR and the price drop for AoMF helped.
When you work out that because of cost you are getting the weapon later, and properties will hold you back further, then that you can't just over-top the DR with damage...
...the concept of the monk doing many attacks for less damage to compete kinda falls down with decreasing iterative attack bonuses and DR in the equation.
This is play experience; not theorycraft. Their ACs typically are not "up to par", and their damage is exceptionally below expectations.A well built monk has little difficulty showing up to his very first PFS game with a 20+ AC.
You're assuming there is a wizard in the party willing to cast mage armour on the monk. If there is no arcane caster with that spell, or if he decides his spells are better used helping party members that can actually pull their weight, you are going to start with AC16.
In other words, a theorycraft monk can have AC20 at level 1, a monk in a real game isn't likely to convince a wizard to blow 30% of his daily resources on buffs to someone who can't pull their own weight alone.
Damage is only sub-par if you set your minimum expectations to "enraged barbarian with a two-handed weapon + power attack."
If that is your expectation then, by all means, show up as the 4th barbarian at the table.
No, damage is sub-par compared to any martial class. At low level it's less emphatic, but it's there.
The weapons other classes can use have greater threat ranges.
Many of them have better damage dice at low levels.
Two-handed weapons increase strength multiplier.
Other martials are not as MAD and so will have on average better strength.
So yeah, you aren't just bad compared to the barbarian, you are bad compared to the fighter, the paladin (when he is not smiting, too), and the TWFing ranger is still going to beat you. Even a rogue will give you a run for your money if he has Weapon Finesse.
In comparison, any newer player with a fighter/barbarian typically comes in swinging nicely and doing their fair share of havok.... you actually have to work to make a Fighter/Barb not good.By this expectation, anybody not rocking an 18+ strength, power attack and a two-handed weapon is under performing.
Naturally this is not the only measure - the game has plenty of other things in it!
Casting spells - except the monk can't.
Special abilities - except the monk's do not help the rest of the party much. In fact some of them don't even hale the monk much!
Skills - the monk is only average. Bards, rangers, and rogues all get more and can do plenty of other stuff (like fight) better than the monk on top.
As I stated earlier. Monk is only under powered if your sole measure of value is raw damage. By this standard, everybody should be playing barbarians, fighters, and melee focused alchemists.
And what do you compare the monk with, then? Magic, special abilities, skills? The monk is underwhelming at all of these to a greater or lesser extent.
Yes, we focus on combat because - and here is the shocker - the monk is meant to be a combat class! He's certainly not a spell-caster or skills monkey, is he?
It's worth noting that although AC is the most common defense - and the one at which the monk is the weakest - the monk has a definite edge over the big, bad ranger/barbarian crowd when it's time to oppose foes that are engaging the other defenses - touch AC, CMD or saving throws.
Yeah, but flat-footed AC means that any rogue getting the drop on you is gauging out your few hit-points along with your kidneys.
Various mobility-enhancing powers also give the monk options when it comes to getting to the key position to do harm. I'd definitely want a barbarian or fighter to go up against the big tough monsters, but when dealing with a grapple-oriented monster, an incorporeal, or - gods forfend! - an enemy enchanter, I'd suddenly prefer the monk. Like the cleric facing undead, there are certain fights he's optimal for.
There are, just as there are foes that play to any character's strengths. The problem is that there are a lot of enemies that the monk can't fight. Indeed, the monsters you list the monk is good at defending against, not at actually hurting.
My point is that there's more than one kind of enemy and more than one kind of attack in PF. I regard high-across-the-board defenses and better mobility as valuable, though it's true that I'd rate the monk near the bottom in order of PCs most likely to get the killing stroke.
As has been said, monks are defensively quite good. The things is, paladins are even better, and are offensively very effective as well, where the monk isn't.
So what are the go-to archetypes for making a STR-based melee monk? (One who's not the "maneuver to set everyone else up" style that's already been mentioned.)
Probably one of two:
1) the martial artist archetype using Dragon Style, as he has the ability to (maybe) bypass any DR, and Dragon Style boosts your damage nicely.2) the weapon master archetype, using a temple sword two-handed with power-attack.
I'm kind of tempted to build a no-archetype PFS monk and see what happens.
Maybe with an oni-spawn tiefling with Armor of the Pit and Dragon Style...?
Does PFS make you blow a feat on being Oni-Spawn or did they realize how stupid that was and pretend that Fiendish Heritage doesn't exist?
Does PFS make you blow a feat on being Oni-Spawn or did they realize how stupid that was and pretend that Fiendish Heritage doesn't exist?I'm kind of tempted to build a no-archetype PFS monk and see what happens.
Maybe with an oni-spawn tiefling with Armor of the Pit and Dragon Style...?
You don't need the feat, thankfully. You don't get to roll on the 1-100 chart either.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Does PFS make you blow a feat on being Oni-Spawn or did they realize how stupid that was and pretend that Fiendish Heritage doesn't exist?I'm kind of tempted to build a no-archetype PFS monk and see what happens.
Maybe with an oni-spawn tiefling with Armor of the Pit and Dragon Style...?
Not only do you not need that feat, but the book it's in isn't even PFS legal (last I checked). No, for PFS your racial options for tieflings are in Blood of Fiends and the Advanced Race Guide.
|
Not any more so than your average wizard. If someone is keeping an enemy locked down, said enemy isn't damaging or hindering your party, which makes that in my book, a win. And if you can get a stun off, you can whale on damage to your heart's content.
Good luck getting the stun off though. You have two points of failure. You have to declare you are using stunning fist before you attack, and if you miss it's wasted. Even if you hit, your DC is likely low unless you poured enough points into WIS that you tanked your AC if you are a STR Monk or your Damage if you are DEX based.
Ironically, the Monk build best suited to use Stunning Fist is a Zen Archer who took the Stunning Fist feat manually and who is using a Ki Focus bow. That lets them Stun at range using Wisdom to hit and to set the DC, along with all of their free Weapon Focus, Specialization, and Mastery feats enhancing the shot.
|
|
Yes, provided you can find a decent temple sword (the only passable weapon the monk has, they don't get any good ones and most suck) or have one crafted, this works for a strength based monk, but in that case AC-sucks and the DM doesn't have this problem. And no, the single-weapon flurry isn't really all that good because the monk still has his other problems.
Sohei monk can flurry with quite a few good weapons, including bows and pole arms.
You're assuming there is a wizard in the party willing to cast mage armour on the monk. If there is no arcane caster with that spell, or if he decides his spells are better used helping party members that can actually pull their weight, you are going to start with AC16....
I am assuming I bought a potion of mage armor.
Yes, I'll pick up a wand after my first or second game. I still keep a potion or two in reserve, just in case.
This is not a monk specific strategy. I also purchase scrolls for most of my casters before their first game. The scroll of magic weapon on my oracle or infernal healing on my wizard can make the difference in a scenario full of level 1 characters.
Those aren't specialties. They're rage powers, part of the core class. They're not feats, they're not archetypes. They are part of the core class.
They can take them as feats! and I actually do like the superstitious line I have trouble not taking it. That said, situationally it may not be a good idea. I've seen GMs threaten to kick people out of the group for taking it because it means they "aren't a team player" and sometimes you have a cleric who hates you for not accepting buffs.
Wasn't this about monks?
|
|
Those aren't specialties. They're rage powers, part of the core class. They're not feats, they're not archetypes. They are part of the core class.They can take them as feats! and I actually do like the superstitious line I have trouble not taking it. That said, situationally it may not be a good idea. I've seen GMs threaten to kick people out of the group for taking it because it means they "aren't a team player" and sometimes you have a cleric who hates you for not accepting buffs.
Wasn't this about monks?
Yes. This is about monks.
It is still amusing when the superstitious barbarian realizes he cannot accept heals. It is a self-correcting problem.
A good buy for a monk is a first level pearl of power and a rod of extend spell. Most wizards are going to have a mage armor memorized at least once , and 2x level should get you through the dungeon
|
|
Those aren't specialties. They're rage powers, part of the core class. They're not feats, they're not archetypes. They are part of the core class.They can take them as feats! and I actually do like the superstitious line I have trouble not taking it. That said, situationally it may not be a good idea. I've seen GMs threaten to kick people out of the group for taking it because it means they "aren't a team player" and sometimes you have a cleric who hates you for not accepting buffs.
Wasn't this about monks?
Yes. This is about monks.
It is still amusing when the superstitious barbarian realizes he cannot accept heals. It is a self-correcting problem.
Except from lay on hands and channel energy, which are neither spells nor does channel energy even give a save for healing. It specifically calls out only giving a save for the damage option.
Superstition only forces you to make saves against spells, not supernaturals or spell likes.
Its always funny when GM's bring this up to me and i show them they don't know what they're talking about.
It still hoses them if you make a bad touch cleric, which I tend to do for Channel Smite and Guided Hand. Which is also a great way to boost to-hit on a monk/cleric of Irori, but it's usually easier to just go Weapon Finesse if you are making a non-STR Monk.
It still hoses them if you make a bad touch cleric,
How so? They get the bonus to saves against spell like and supernatural.
Again, we should move back to the monk probably...
|
|
A good buy for a monk is a first level pearl of power and a rod of extend spell. Most wizards are going to have a mage armor memorized at least once , and 2x level should get you through the dungeon
Thanks for the tip BNW. Won't help when my friends sorcerer comes along, but it will when my wife plays her witch.
Ok, so this is my first post here and I keep seeing that monks are a weaker class just about every place I look.First off, you need to know your history.
Frank explains it in his post Why Monks?
Now, Paizo has made some revamps to the monk since that post was made. Some help, some don't. Some archetypes are the bomb-diggity. But the core monk is still a very oddly-specific tool that must be used in just the right way to have any effect.
TOZ, quoting Trollman?
I actually kind of miss him now that he's gone. Bright guy, but phrased his arguments to draw the maximum amount of hate. They could have named an aggro mechanic after him.
|
|
It still hoses them if you make a bad touch cleric,How so? They get the bonus to saves against spell like and supernatural.
Again, we should move back to the monk probably...
Because if the only cleric in the party channels neg. energy, then they can't be healed while raging. They have to take the saves vs healing spells, so cure spells will fizzle. The work-around channel energy isn't available for them.
Edit: To bring this back to Monks, one of the best defensive abilities for Monk, Diamond Soul has the same weakness. If they have Spell Resistance up, they can't be healed or buffed by spells unless they either A) take a Standard Action to lower it, or B) the ally beats the SR.
TOZ, quoting Trollman?
Successful Troll supports fellow troll efforts!
Sohei monk can flurry with quite a few good weapons, including bows and pole arms.
Yes, provided you can find a decent temple sword (the only passable weapon the monk has, they don't get any good ones and most suck) or have one crafted, this works for a strength based monk, but in that case AC-sucks and the DM doesn't have this problem. And no, the single-weapon flurry isn't really all that good because the monk still has his other problems.
One of the few good archetypes, that. Most monks do not get this option, though, and most of those weapons are not actually superior to the temple sword.
You're assuming there is a wizard in the party willing to cast mage armour on the monk. If there is no arcane caster with that spell, or if he decides his spells are better used helping party members that can actually pull their weight, you are going to start with AC16....I am assuming I bought a potion of mage armor.
Of course - my bad, I forgot everyone in PFS gets the same starting gold. Still, that doesn't last you long. Drink at the wrong mpment and it is wasted.
Yes, I'll pick up a wand after my first or second game. I still keep a potion or two in reserve, just in case.
Do you also take Use Magic Device as a skill? Without it you still depend on someone else.
This is not a monk specific strategy. I also purchase scrolls for most of my casters before their first game. The scroll of magic weapon on my oracle or infernal healing on my wizard can make the difference in a scenario full of level 1 characters.
Yeah, but they are buying items they can use themselves.
It is still amusing when the superstitious barbarian realizes he cannot accept heals. It is a self-correcting problem.
Kinda like the monk with Diamond Soul, then. Only he has the option of not taking it as a core barbarian.
A good buy for a monk is a first level pearl of power and a rod of extend spell. Most wizards are going to have a mage armor memorized at least once , and 2x level should get you through the dungeon
I see this a lot, and while it's a valid tactic how many classes rely on buffs just to function normally? It's a fix that highlight's the classes' weakness.
A good buy for a monk is a first level pearl of power and a rod of extend spell. Most wizards are going to have a mage armor memorized at least once , and 2x level should get you through the dungeonI see this a lot, and while it's a valid tactic how many classes rely on buffs just to function normally? It's a fix that highlight's the classes' weakness.
I'm actually not fond of the idea of using other classes to shore up one classes features myself. I like how a class functions to be self contained. "if you have a wizard!" "if you have a cleric!" ideas are great, and I'm happy synergy happens, but the class should be able to function on its own.
The people claiming monks are weak usually measure a character's worth only by the damage he can deal.
That is not true at all. There are threads go in DETAIL on the various issues.
The first issue is that the monk has no real focus, and from there things are broken down even more.
They sit right beside the threads complaining about the monk being overpowered.
The overpowered monk thread tend to pop up whenever a DM realizes there is no effective way to damage a well built monk without wiping the rest of the party.
I have never seen such a monk because it does not exist unless the monk player knows what he is doing, and everyone is well below the bar for system mastery.
The only way this might happen is with an archetype or multiclassing.
Now if you link to one of these these I have no problem proving this point.