| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, you're making a LOT of assumptions. First and foremost is that a non-munchkin PC is a death magnet. It's not. I've survived plenty of deadly encounters with non-optimized characters. It's all about finding a solution to the problem at hand.
It's a matter of perception. If the player feels like they need to do something to make themselves more likely to survive after losing a PC then they will do so. I think Jiggy might be onto something. I mean look at the PC he made that was so "munchkin" after the death of his previous character.
Pros
- Exceptionally high AC
- Strong CMD
- Strong saves across the board.
Cons
- It's a monk. And one that likely is mediocre or worse at offense (largely dependent upon the stat allocation, but likely if you're emphasizing "not die" so much your Dex/Wisdom is probably going to vastly outweigh your Strength and offensive statistics).
He's optimized defense. Why would someone do that? Not because they want to steal the show I'd say. More likely because they want to survive to continue the show.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monk (Secretly): Man I wish any of my attacks would hit, and when they did they'd do more than tickle. Damn Paladin and his ability to wear armor to have a higher AC, have similarly good saves, and a higher normal damage output.
You reminded me of this... XD
And I noted several times that this is monk trying hard vs a guy with a sword. Not a guy with a special sword. Not a guy whose buffed up. He's not even using his ranger spell lead blades (lead blades brings his 1d8 longsword to 2d6, and his 2d6 greatsword to 3d6 damage, and if we want to talk about what relying on other PCs to function includes then we'll take enlarge person instead, thanks, because that will turn us into an engine of terrible destruction with 3d6 longswords and 4d6 greatswords). So we can keep pushing the envelope, but we're already talking about buffing the monk to keep up with the ranger without buffs. Exactly how much more do we need here again?
Then there was this joke of an argument about monks being for combat maneuvers like it was a class feature or something. Anyone who wants to take a moment to count 1 + 2 + 3 could probably figure out that the Monk's combat maneuvers aren't actually any higher than any other full martial class. The NPC warrior class (those guys who are considered to be worth about 1/2 a class level) can match them. Barbarians make monks cry when it comes to mobile combat maneuvers.
I mean barbarians be all like "Hah, I'm made of muscle and I love to wrestle, and I move fast and my speed actually stacks with haste", and then all of a sudden they're like "RAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHH!!" and then they jump like 30 feet onto something twice their size, grabbing them with their teeth and throwing them to the ground in some sort of super angry enraged judo death throw, tearing them apart with their bear hands and 22 strength modifier, dealing unarmed damage, dealing axe damage, claw damage, bite damage, dignity and shame damage. And while this is happening, the monk is standing in the corner, knees shaking, putting on red lipstick and mascara, wearing women's underwear as he struggles with a crisis of identity as he stares confused at the oiled up body builder that oozes testosterone and win from every orifice of his body and bathed in the sweet pheromones of his dead enemies' blood, sweat, and tears.
The barbarian pats the monk on the shoulder. "Good game dude. Oh, I think you spilled your drink." he says to the monk as he goes by. The monk begins to cry, because he didn't spill his drink. He begins to cry because he knows he will never be able to compare to that. Knowing that will have to continue dressing as the Barbarian during his special alone time, so he can pet and caress an effigy of himself that is eerily similar to a voodoo doll, while whispering sweet nothings like "it's okay monk, everyone knows you're really better at combat maneuvers than that big, bulging, oiled, hot, sexy shoeless god of war. Now, let's speak no more of this, because I have an oil of grease in my bad pocket and my hands are full".
We are on session 26 and about 10 games ago the min/maxer's character died. He did a new character, a monk, and has just gone nuts with munchkining it. I have tried to explain how I feel but it is going on deaf ears apparently.
I do not want to punish the rest of the group because of one character. I try very hard to balance the encounter for the group and CR, but when you have a 4th level character who can bump his AC to 32 during an encounter it makes it pretty hard.
I only got this far and started giggling my ass off:
Min/maxing with a Monk?? Really? Gee he must not have read the thousands of posts that talk about how underpowered Monks are.
He's optimized defense. Why would someone do that? Not because they want to steal the show I'd say. More likely because they want to survive to continue the show.
It does, however, generate some bias for the attentions of a GM. GMs don't like to miss when they think their numbers are high, just like players.
Which is what I think is going on here.
I only got this far and started giggling my ass off:
Min/maxing with a Monk?? Really? Gee he must not have read the thousands of posts that talk about how underpowered Monks are.
Thousands of posts do not mean it’s true. There is a highly vocal minority that has been around since the first Monk came out that feels that a Monk needs do everything Bruce Lee can do @ 1st level, what a wu-shu movie martial artist can do by 10th , and out DPR every other class, and if they aren’t doing all this they are clearly underpowered as… well heck, they saw that in a movie and it was really, REALLY cool.
Not to mention, if his campaign had a very power game savvy Player who wrote up a monk that slipped in a few fast ones then sure, for that game, THAT monk could be a game breaker. And, frankly,THAT PARTICULAR MONK was a game-breaker, no matter the opinion of anyone else on how powerful the monk class in general might be.
But hekc, every single thread where the word "monk" is mentioned has to go into a long argument about how underpowered it is, so please have fun and continue your sermon to the choir.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a highly vocal minority that has been around since the first Monk came out that feels that a Monk needs do everything Bruce Lee can do @ 1st level, what a wu-shu movie martial artist can do by 10th , and out DPR every other class, and if they aren’t doing all this they are clearly underpowered as… well heck, they saw that in a movie and it was really, REALLY cool.
There's also a vocal majority who want them to stack up as slightly better than a Warrior NPC on equal footing...
He's optimized defense. Why would someone do that? Not because they want to steal the show I'd say. More likely because they want to survive to continue the show.It does, however, generate some bias for the attentions of a GM. GMs don't like to miss when they think their numbers are high, just like players.
Which is what I think is going on here.
That's possible, but it's something that GMs need to get over and get over it early. The crux of defense in D&D is damage mitigation or evasion. Martials do not soak enough damage to allow them to be hit constantly and keep going (with some barbarians being good exceptions). Just as an example:
20th level Fighter with a +7 Con modifier (14 base, +4-5 inherent, +6 item) has about 254 HP at 20th level. Again, with a +7 Constitution modifier (that's a pretty good Con modifier even at 20th level :o). However, damage at this level per hit is pretty high (power attack at this level can add +18 or more damage to each attack in a routine, and creatures with multiple primary attacks can be very dangerous).
You get the most mileage by pumping defenses. Things like AC, miss %, and energy resistances are staples of high level play so you don't get wiped by mooks applying energy damage and can mitigate large amounts of damage from multiple buffed enemies spamming attacks at you.
By 20th level our Fighter with purchase-only gear and some common buff spells (GMW, shield of faith, etc) can be looking at an AC in the low fifties (+5 full plate w/kilt, +5 heavy steel shield, +5 natural, +5 deflection, +1 insight, +4-7 Dex, etc). The monster creation chart shoes the unbuffed to-hit of the high attack being at +30 for a CR 20 creature which puts you in the 95% avoidance bracket at 20th level. Then you get some 20% concealment to avoid 1/5th of the attacks that do get through and make you immune to sneak attacks. Drop a little extra money on getting some minor resistances to elemental damage to avoid getting mob-spammed with energy attacks.
Since classes like Paladins and Rangers can easily take Craft Magical Arms & Armor, they can get their AC up with mithral celestial plate mail and a good Dexterity bonus. Barbarians can do well with this as well if they have someone to craft it for them, otherwise they should use mithral armor and rage powers (possibly with layered defenses of heavy damage reductions from indomitable if that's your thing, but they also have more HP to soak damage compared to other martials).
But if a GM thinks even 25% of NPC attacks should hit a dedicated tank then either the GM is a cheater or the entire party is going to wipe and wipe quickly.
Guys, can we not have the 1254th thread degrade into yet another Monk argument?
Oh I'm sorry that I'm contributing to the ruination of "I don't like my players to be good at things, how do I make them stoppit" thread #17861.
Where do you guys get these numbers? Have you counted all the threads yourself?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a magical sense that tells me how many of each thread category there are, not sure about Deth.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where do you guys get these numbers? Have you counted all the threads yourself?
Guys, can we not have the 1254th thread degrade into yet another Monk argument?
Oh I'm sorry that I'm contributing to the ruination of "I don't like my players to be good at things, how do I make them stoppit" thread #17861.
Look behind them.
I have a magical sense that tells me how many of each thread category there are, not sure about Deth.
I use the Rite of AshkEnte. He's a relative, I get a discount.
There is a very easy way to address this. Make them realize that this game isn't just about combat and that they should invest in other things like skills and items they may need. Also, give character incentives to do interesting things. There's nothing wrong with handing out cool things to the characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i am the munchkin this thread is my fault lol charter build available on link
new post includes over sites on my part brought to my attention and is included on posted build
over sites are listed
-win games
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2px2u?the-muchkin-monk#1
|
You can pull it off, just not as often from what you have posted.
- Ki pool is needed since the Shield spell can not be used.
- The forementioned Shield spell can not be used as a potion.
- Bracers of Armor does not stack with Mage Armor
- Crane Style and Turtle Style can not be used together with your Monk of the Four Winds Archetype.
Overall, with Fighting Defensively with the changes, you can pull off easily, including Mage Armor, 28 AC. Now you have the option of using a Shield of Faith potion, replacing your Deflection bonus to +2, but only for 1 minute. You can also spend that Ki Point to give yourself that +4 AC Bonus; however, keep in mind that it uses up a swift action, meaning that you can no switch styles if you boost.
With that, you have this Fighting Defensivly:
- 10 Base
- 5 DEX
- 3 WIS
- 4 Armor (Mage Armor)
- 2 Deflection (Potion of Shield of Faith)
- 1 Dodge OR Shield (Crane Style OR Snapping Turtle Style)
- 1 (Monk's AC Bonus)
- 3 (Fighting Defensively, Acro Rank 3+)
- Fighting Defensively - 29 AC (5/day - AC 33 (Ki Pool of 5))
- Figthing Defensivly w/o Poitons - 25 AC
- Standard w/ Potions (Turtle Style) - 26 AC
- Standard w/o Potions (Turtle Style) - 22 AC
So with this to the player, and to the OP: It is not a munchkin, just an error in the clarification of the rules/data given.
|
Short answer: You don't.
Long answer: Munchkining and minmaxing are really matters of play style. Most of my GM friends like epic, glorious battle and reject PC's that aren't swinging at least 1 +4 modifier and encourage the most judicious use of figures to wring every last ounce of capability you can out of a build. Anyone who prefers suboptimal 'flavor' builds gets frustrated and weeded out of those games quickly.
(That's not to say everybody has to play a Master Summoner or God Wizard. But if you have a build in mind, you'd better make sure that you're not going to be outclassed in every factor. I probably wouldn't play any 'Shaman' Druid variants, for instance.)
For me, personally, I prefer a more low powered and tactically minded game, but the majority of people I game with are now used to uberstats and love watching their modifiers and multipliers go up, up, up. Nobody's wrong or munchkining, it's just a matter of preference.
So, what do you do? The obvious answer seems just to bump the CR's. Treat APL +1 as your average encounter and go from there. If it's just 1 or 2 players in a party of 4-5, mix it up. They obviously want that build to feel special and powerful, so let them a couple of times when it isn't going to have much bearing on the story. But every build has a weak spot. Every. Single. One. If they're going to wreck some big boss battle you were planning, take a different approach to it. If they hit too hard, don't let the boss face them directly. If they're too defensively sound, throw a hundred debuffs their way. And there's nothing wrong with specifically targeting the most powerful member of a group to bring him down to a more manageable level---smart players will do that in encounters; there's no reason to assume an intelligent enemy wouldn't do the same.
The only real problem I find is when a Powergamer and a Roleplayer are each doing something very similar. But again, in that case, it would only be common sense for a calculating enemy to neutralize the greatest threat or at least bring him down a few pegs. That's also a good lesson for any gamer to learn: Being powerful may be fun, but it attracts attention.
Phew, a lot of responses here.
So I'll only throw in my two cents:
1. Emphasize role-playing. It's far more difficult to munchkin that.
2. Diversify your obstacles to make sure every character weak or strong can play a major part. A munchkin can't be everywhere right?
Fluidity, improvisation, and Role Playing are what set table top games apart from Video Games. If you focus on the characters and not the "challenges" themselves you'll find it's easier to deal with munchkins because their powers mean basically nothing in the face of the role-playing environment.
"Challenges" being in quotes because in the end the raw mechanical challenges of this game are just random chance. We're really all here for the adventure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BLASPHEMY !!!INCONCEIVABLE !!!
MY CAPS LOCK IS STUCK! HELP!
LOUD NOISES!I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE YELLING ABOUT!MY CAPS LOCK IS STUCK! HELP!BLASPHEMY !!!INCONCEIVABLE !!!
I GET THAT REFERENCE!!
I swear that if you kids don't stop yelling I'll turn this topic around right now!