my tetori's record for grappling, is 6 targets simultaneously. this proves to me that you dont have system mastery and you are talking out of ignorance.
Your definition of "proof" is a very loose one. And you still have to reach all those targets instead of, you know... Spending a standard action to cast a spell.
sohei can have rapid shot flurry of blows and many shot as a full attack action, they gain weapon training and retain all the monky goodness you need. in terms of pure damage no other archer can compete without spell assistance.
Ah, right, Sohei. I'm confusing it with another archetype. The one I like to call 'Fighter-who-calls-himself-a-Monk".
It's a good archer, yes... Best archer? I dunno about that.
sensai can give buffs to players that no other character can,
"Unique" doesn't necessarily equal "better".
when mixed with drunken master they have a near limitless pool of ki to fuel those abilities, which gives them not only greater flexibility in how they buff, but more "spells" per day as a result. in this very thread i posted a framework of my sohei/DM/MotFW/qiggong character. and i will fight to the death to prove that he is a more "valuable" character then a buffer wizard or even a bard
I saw that build. It's a cool build. One cool very-specific build that is still nowhere as versatile as a Wizard... Even if it's a better buff-bot (and I'm not sure it is.)
But then again, full-casters are kind of an unfair comparison.
Who the hell cares what a wizard can do in a discussion about monks? Wizards aren't relevant. PCs don't fight PCs, they fight monsters and such.sensai can give buffs to players that no other character can, when mixed with drunken master they have a near limitless pool of ki to fuel those abilities, which gives them not only greater flexibility in how they buff, but more "spells" per day as a result. in this very thread i posted a framework of my sohei/DM/MotFW/qiggong character. and i will fight to the death to prove that he is a more "valuable" character then a buffer wizzard or even a bardOr... I could have a wizard and haste. and fly. and see invisibility. and great invisibility. and make a feast from nothing. and warp reality to create a demiplane to own some really nice real estate in where I can even control the weather. I think I like the wizard better, if only for that last one.
Someone just said that the monk was a better support than the wizard, so I stated what a wizard can do that a monk cannot. Haste in particular is amazing.
Name a monster that a monk is helpless to contribute meaningfully against.
Schrodinger Monk wins everything! He has infinite ki and all feats and class features that are even just remotely related to Monks.
Name a monster that a monk is helpless to contribute meaningfully against.
Anything that flies. Something invisible. Something with a great fort save and high AC? All of the above at once. Mind you the first one eats up martials pretty well too.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
that's like saying save or suck spells are bad because the enemy might save.No. Because Save or Suck spells usually target touch AC (which gets to about 8-9 by mid levels) or just auto-hit, and spellcasters can pump their save DC's much more easily (because other than Con and Casting Stat, what all do they need?), and most good Save or Suck spells are reflex/will saves. Not fort saves which most melee characters have as good saves, and have a con bonus. Now, if they were will saves, maybe it would be better. As is, you need to make an attack roll (at one of your lower attack bonuses), hit, and they need to fail their best save. Totally different.
of course, you have to hope that nobody notices you failed to factor in the large number of attacks per round monks get.You only get elemental fist once per round. Drunken Strength isn't that much. The massive amount of attacks must all hit (with very little to buff them).
I think that looking at monks from a numbers standpoint will make them seem unneeded. I think you'd be surprised at how well they do within the context of a fairly balanced group.
The fact that someone can do something better doesn't mean they are going to. I've seen very few here who have stayed that they've played monks say that they suck.
Druids are far more powerful though. :)
I totally agree that monks don't suck. My PFS monk is more MAD then most, and he still contributes to any party he is in, since he can tank, do decent damage (not great, but enough for primary DPS), party face, scout, and a bunch of other things. It is great when you don't know party composition and need to head in prepared for anything.
Who the hell cares what a wizard can do in a discussion about monks? Wizards aren't relevant. PCs don't fight PCs, they fight monsters and such.sensai can give buffs to players that no other character can, when mixed with drunken master they have a near limitless pool of ki to fuel those abilities, which gives them not only greater flexibility in how they buff, but more "spells" per day as a result. in this very thread i posted a framework of my sohei/DM/MotFW/qiggong character. and i will fight to the death to prove that he is a more "valuable" character then a buffer wizzard or even a bardOr... I could have a wizard and haste. and fly. and see invisibility. and great invisibility. and make a feast from nothing. and warp reality to create a demiplane to own some really nice real estate in where I can even control the weather. I think I like the wizard better, if only for that last one.
That's exactly the point : the monk cannot do anything to help the party that ANY other class can do.
Flanking partners ? All classes can do that.
Do damage ? Any class can at least compare to, or vastly outdamage a monk.
Manoeuvers ? Only a barbarian can make use of manoeuvers beyond low levels because of how the CMB/CMD system works.
Everything the monk has is focused on self survival. But it doesn't help the party to overcome challenges (be it monsters, traps, social encounters, ...).
So, the monk is a selfish class in a game focused in team power.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lemmy's right as to the schrodinger complaint. Build or it didn't happen.Name a monster that a monk is helpless to contribute meaningfully against.Schrodinger Monk wins everything! He has infinite ki and all feats and class features that are even just remotely related to Monks.
Ciretose and me are agreeing on a Schrodinger statement... Rovagug must be waking up! Take cover, people! Doomsday is here!(And it's capable of killing Superman!)
Seriously, though. Why I don't think builds are necessary every time, when people use a million different solutions from a million different (and often incompatible) builds to explain how a character/class/whatever is awesome something, it's worse than even the most shameless Schrodinger Wizard. The Wizard at least has the possibility of having all the right spells, and he has divinations and spells with permanent effects... It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
But how can a character have all the right builds at all times?
To be clear, I do think that Monks can be built into effective characters. My complaint is that they most often end up looking nothing like what you'd expect from a Monk when doing so.
Personally, I'd just remove FoB for a scaling bonus to attack rolls made with unarmed strikes and monk weapons (as well as combat maneuvers). This would make things simpler and solve the problem of "if you move, your accuracy sucks!".
This bonus could be equal to 1+1/4 Monk level. This way it'd be about the same as a Full BAB, but still keep the medium BAB progression that so many people seem irrationally attached to. Having a cheaper version of the AoMF would be nice too... e.g.: costs half the price and only affects unarmed strike. If Paizo is worried about unarmed characters TWFing for half the price, despite all the disadvantages of unarmed strikes, just make it so the bonus doesn't apply to off-hand attacks.
I'm honestly lost here, has Justin Rocket never fought NPCs with class levels?
In response to an earlier question about whether Monk's lack of full BAB bothered me flavor-wise or if I didn't like how the abilities get complicated because of fake full BAB, I'd say the answer is both.
On the flavor side the base attack bonus is supposed to represent it's "skill in combat". Overall I see monk as a wuxia level martial artist making anything less that full BAB make little sense.
Mechanics and complications-wise I think that full BAB would simplify things dramatically, but it would also keep monk from being too married to flurry of blows. Having your main offensive capability requiring you to be immobile sucks when you have a d8 hit die.
Considering that Monk can debuff with a hit I'm not concerned with his crappy damage but its really hard to hit with a monk and I think full BAB would allow it to qualify for things early enough to be relevant and not have to always sit still just to hit stuff (which doesn't hit that well either.) which makes stunning fist so awkward because you lose the attempt when you miss.
That said it's not impossible to make a Monk that does stuff. As someone said before he's the best martial side-kick. If I were to say there was a role for Monk it would be 'support martial'; it can dodge and survive a lot of attacks, is lethal to casters and other controllers and can dish out some debuffs. In many ways he's made to make surgical strikes towards potent but physically weak enemies. Problem is that like a few classes having this narrow of a role has ended in a few too many TPKs.
Anything that flies. Something invisible. Something with a great fort save and high AC? All of the above at once. Mind you the first one eats up martials pretty well too.A party of adventurers probably has a spell caster who can get the monk, fighter, etc. into the air. Or, the monk may have Cloud Step or a ring of flying (the ring being ubiuitous after a certain level). Or be Quingong with Blood Crow Strike or elven with bow prof..
Detecting an invisible character within 30ft is a Per DC 20 check, something the Monk should be able to do easily. Detecting the invis creature's specific location is something benefitted by having a lot of attacks per round. Being able to grapple well is a benefit as well.
Against something with a great fort save and high AC, the Monk might use Touch of Serenity.
Many if you sort of I mean might have a thing to handle the problem that isn't a monk related thing yeah kinda?
I hate the custom built, tightly-focused, uber min-maxed build used to prove that X is god in one narrow trick.
What's stopping you from making a versatile well-rounded build, then? No one is asking you to make a Monk who is the best at everything and a little more.
Name a level. Note that I don't have Hero Builder (I have the trial, but it doesn't use archetypes), so I have to do it all manually. It'll take some time.I hate the custom built, tightly-focused, uber min-maxed build used to prove that X is god in one narrow trick.What's stopping you from making a versatile well-rounded build, then? No one is asking you to make a Monk who is the best at everything and a little more.
12th is a good level. 20th level builds are a bit irrelevant for most part. 12 is the top level in PFS, and it's a level that most, if not all, AP have adventures for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's exactly the point : the monk cannot do anything to help the party that ANY other class can do.
So? Clerics spells are better than the paladin, the paladin DPR can be replciated by a fighter of a barbarian. PAladin saves are comparable with the monk and superstitious barbarian. Paladin have party buff, other classes have party buff too.
Everything a paladin can do some other class can do it too.
Paladins also do the job competently and don't require much system mastery. Give him a two hand and power attack and he's probably good for life. They also have a lot of class features that give them those things that work together, and they have spell casting. They also have full BAB+, like most of the successful front liners. They bring auras which are unique, and they're class features aren't just bonus feats or features that make up for not having something(at least 3 of monks are).
That's exactly the point : the monk cannot do anything to help the party that ANY other class can do.
So? Clerics spells are better than the paladin, the paladin DPR can be replciated by a fighter of a barbarian. PAladin saves are comparable with the monk and superstitious barbarian. Paladin have party buff, other classes have party buff too.
Everything a paladin can do some other class can do it too.
Self healing in combat. Being Fear Immune. Helping others to overcome fear (and later other stuff) without wasting resources or actions (thanks to the aura)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to wait until you all agree on a level.
All the levels. Show how it varies between getting individual abilities and gear. There's no guarantee you'll be able to start at the specified level.
These NPCs know nothing of "class" which is a meta-game concept.
But when they have a Monk and a Fighter applying for the same job, they'll want to know what skills each can offer them when danger strikes.
|
|
They'll both say, "I'm an experienced and highly trained expert with deep martial skill". Well, depending on his point spread, the fighter might say only, "me bash".
Which is a meaningless resume statement. What can you do? Specifics.
No.
Without Hero Maker, I don't have time to do that.
Your choice. Of course, do it once and you have it available for every other time anyone asks you about it, no matter what level they specify.
|
|
I don't get paid for game design.
Your choice. Of course, do it once and you have it available for every other time anyone asks you about it, no matter what level they specify.
This is volunteer work. No one is saying you must volunteer.
I was assuming you wanted to convince the other people in this thread that you were right. If not, then you certainly have no reason to devote your time to it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
this is the Paizo messageboards. the probability of convincing someone they are wrong is infinitismal.
This is the internet. Isn't arguing the point?
Besides, best moment is when I'm proven wrong. Means I learn something.
And dropping out of rage is a free action, while lowering/raising SR is a standard.Yes, it is a free action, that gives you a -2 penalty to str&dex, and prevents you from raging fora while. It is rather hard to do and still stay relevent in combat until you get a.)The rage power that lets you rage while fatigued, which is a 1 time thing, and you are burning it instead of getting beast totem, superstition, CAGM, etc. b.)Moment of clarity, same trouble as the previous, or c.)Start Rage Cycling. Now, I will admit that it is better than SR, but not "just" because it is a free action to drop.
Huh, was sure my post said dropping out and entering rage was a free action. That's what I get for not double-checking before I hit the submit button...
Being able to enter rage as a free action does make coordinating buffs a lot easier, (all you need to do is delay until the buffers turn if he's casting a battle buff. Standard action means the monk really can't have their SR suppressed for buffing, then bring it up easily.
Even if dropping out of rage (with no rage-cycling) includes a debuff, having the options is nice. It's not a common scenario, but there might be times when you need that spell to go through more than you need to keep ragign. Besides, there plenty of rage-cycling options,
|
I hate the custom built, tightly-focused, uber min-maxed build used to prove that X is god in one narrow trick.
For that reason, I wanted to have a specific monster be named, so that I could provide several general build tactics that might beat that monster.
Being able to be beat a single monster isn't meaningful. Being able to create a build that can be competitive against many things, is.
12th is a good level. 20th level builds are a bit irrelevant for most part. 12 is the top level in PFS, and it's a level that most, if not all, AP have adventures for.Name a level. Note that I don't have Hero Builder (I have the trial, but it doesn't use archetypes), so I have to do it all manually. It'll take some time.I hate the custom built, tightly-focused, uber min-maxed build used to prove that X is god in one narrow trick.What's stopping you from making a versatile well-rounded build, then? No one is asking you to make a Monk who is the best at everything and a little more.I've been working on gear for a 20th level monk for almost an hour now. So, now a 12th?
I'm going to wait until you all agree on a level.
do it 20 then, I was just trying to break the stale