Now I know this is gonna get a lot of Monk fans complaining but, as a monk fan, this is kinda true.
Is there any reason to play a monk? Not really unless its the specific idea you have in mind (Bald Headed guy who fights using Kung Fu)
The Brawler does the Unarmed fighting gimmick very well and with the ability to count any close weapon as dealing unarmed damage (To a max of 2d6 at level 20). The Unarmed Fighter can be made better at it as well.
Other then the mystical abilities, most if not all of which are easily done by having a wizard in your party or a load of wands or scrolls on you. Or you know have 2.200 GP laying around for a Ring of Feather Fall.
I mean to mimic the Monk a Brawler needs to take 1 trait to get UMD and then carry around a load of scrolls and wands and just make UMD checks and in fact do much better then the monk at his own gimmicks.
So is there a reason?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope. There's no reason to play a monk even if you do want to be 'bald kung fu guy', because many other classes do it better.
The monk has always been in the cellar, sharing space with the rogue for 'Why?!'
No no no see the Rogue was at least a skill monkey and had trap abilities (Now a lot of classes have trap abilities true)
But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.
If they do have for example a cool Archetype they restrict it from working with a few good complimenting archetypes.
Basically the Brawler with Monk Robes adds Wis to AC (Treated as a Monk after all) and AC bonus of a Monk five levels higher... which stacks with his own AC boost as Dodge bonuses stack with itself.
Well, this will only end in tears.
agreed
I play with a lot of third party so for me I play monk to shoot hadokens debuff and have a lot of caster defenses.
it's sad that i play monks with this archetype
Indeed.
It is sad that a CORE class has basically been completely made irrelevant with the fact that if they do give it a nice cool ability to give it to everyone. Brass Knuckles was something nice the Monk had, not very powerful over all. Nope can't have that now can we?
Not sure if you somehow got 18 in Str, Dex, and Wis if that would even make a difference to a monk in the long run. And that says something.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, because this game is all about winning with teh awzumest bildz.
Honestly even before using third party stuff I never felt weak as a Monk. I've had issues with Rogue but as a Monk I felt like a pretty decent support frontliner.
Yep, because this game is all about winning with teh awzumest bildz.
Except its not awzumest bildz that out pace the monk in every field they are common builds, or at least ones focused on unarmed combat and put a little effort forward
And sorry but all I keep seeing in discussions of builds for a monk to be useful is "Oh get a AoMF"... so wait to be anything but hopelessly kidding myself I need to buy an item that can cost as much as 100,000 gp?
And thats to be on par with a guy who paid half that for his +5 sword and now he can do a 1.5 x str and add this plus five, oh and if he crits it all gets multiplied.
You might want good Will saves?
So you are saying a class should exist only because of all good saves?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, because this game is all about winning with teh awzumest bildz.
while i get your point, the game definitely isn't about purposefully doing worse either.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
*has yet to play a monk that was not extremely powerful in any party he was in*.
Core monk is stronger than it looks, too. But once you touch the archetypes there are innumerable reasons to play a monk. Brawlers are a nice class but they don't get Ki abilities, have lower saves and aren't as defensive. Martial flexibility is awesome, true but monks have several abilities that are not readily cloned by any existing combat feats.
Monks are also faster, get more attacks a round, are more able outside of combat and one of the top classes to pick if you want to ensure your ability to survive any possible situation. There are quite a few that even a paladin can find daunting in which a monk will excell.
The monk needs work, true. But it is not an inflexible class with no power compared to others. It can tank, DPs, debuff and more with the rest of the gang. It takes a lot of knowledge of the game to play one effectively for optimization but they aren't the underachievers some might make you believe. Also, monks have great style. That matters, too.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, because this game is all about winning with teh awzumest bildz.while i get your point, the game definitely isn't about purposefully doing worse either.
It is if you are a ROLE player, not a ROLL player. S*&+ty mechanical choices build character, something filthy min-maxing munchkin WoW players wouldn't understand.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.
First things first, nobody hates the monk. It hasn't lived up to everyone's expectations, certainly, but there's no reason to take that personally or ascribe it to malice. It's a tricky bit of design space that's trying to do a lot of different things at once.
As to the brawler--people complained that the monk wasn't good enough at unarmed combat, so they wrote a version of the monk that focuses on unarmed combat--at the cost of the monk's mystical abilities.
And yeah, you can replicate a lot of those with UMD...if you want to spend the traits, gold, magic item slots, and actions in combat to do so :)
Yep, because this game is all about winning with teh awzumest bildz.while i get your point, the game definitely isn't about purposefully doing worse either.It is if you are a ROLE player, not a ROLL player. S@%!ty mechanical choices build character, something filthy min-maxing munchkin WoW players wouldn't understand.
role play works out well until you don't actually fill in your roll. and roll play isn't neccissary for specific classes. lore warden - monk, dirty trick fighter - rogue, etc. i like making rogueish characters out of fighters because I can wear bigger armor and still sneak pretty well.
also, the only thing I can actually say the monk is brokenly OP at, is tanking, but most encounters die quick enough that this usually isn't a prime job in PF. I mean if you build them right, they're simply untouchable.
*has yet to play a monk that was not extremely powerful in any party he was in*.
Core monk is stronger than it looks, too. But once you touch the archetypes there are innumerable reasons to play a monk. Brawlers are a nice class but they don't get Ki abilities, have lower saves and aren't as defensive. Martial flexibility is awesome, true but monks have several abilities that are not readily cloned by any existing combat feats.
Monks are also faster, get more attacks a round, are more able outside of combat and one of the top classes to pick if you want to ensure your ability to survive any possible situation. There are quite a few that even a paladin can find daunting in which a monk will excell.
The monk needs work, true. But it is not an inflexible class with no power compared to others. It can tank, DPs, debuff and more with the rest of the gang. It takes a lot of knowledge of the game to play one effectively for optimization but they aren't the underachievers some might make you believe. Also, monks have great style. That matters, too.
I love monks, both for flavor and mechanics but this is just annoying.
We have a class that is really cool.. and they have constantly thrown out clones of it that strictly speaking are much better then the class in a field it was originally meant to excel at.Sure Monk has Ki abilities, but none of them are all that good either. Sure I can heal my monk level with 2 ki points or I can swig a potion of cure light or moderate wounds and heal about the same with no spent ki.
Sure I can teleport.. but when I do I cannot use my second main gimmick my FoB I have to wait a full turn to do what I am suppose to be good at.
I drop off a roof I have to hug the wall.. while the rest of the party uses their rings of feather fall and have to wait for me to slide down, potentially drawing attention to the party.
I know that some people with good skills in optimizing the class can really make the monk strong. But not the strongest at what he does. If you put a Optimized Monk, Optimized for highest possible Unarmed Attack against a Fighter or Barbarian Optimized for the same thing, they are gonna be higher and hit more often (Just not as many attacks per round).
Heck not hard to do really. Give then a way to add Dex to Damage, grant Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat (Unarmed attacks should ALWAYS be counted as Finessed honestly.) Give them the ability to count Monk weapons for their unarmed damage progression at a level reduce -5 or something. Wanna be clever add Wis to both Hit and Damage as Ki abilities.
Heck give them a Parry and Riposte Deed ability because that is how a monk should be fighting.
Sure they are fast.. but what can they do when they run ahead 90 feet.
No offense, but I think he was being sarcastic.role play works out well until you don't actually fill in your roll. and roll play isn't neccissary for specific classes. lore warden - monk, dirty trick fighter - rogue, etc. i like making rogueish characters out of fighters because I can wear bigger armor and still sneak pretty well.
also, the only thing I can actually say the monk is brokenly OP at, is tanking, but most encounters die quick enough that this usually isn't a prime job in PF. I mean if you build them right, they're simply untouchable.
But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.First things first, nobody hates the monk. It hasn't lived up to everyone's expectations, certainly, but there's no reason to take that personally or ascribe it to malice. It's a tricky bit of design space that's trying to do a lot of different things at once.
As to the brawler--people complained that the monk wasn't good enough at unarmed combat, so they wrote a version of the monk that focuses on unarmed combat--at the cost of the monk's mystical abilities.
And yeah, you can replicate a lot of those with UMD...if you want to spend the traits, gold, magic item slots, and actions in combat to do so :)
I am willing to say I respect the designers for their work. But it really feels like the class is being taunted because some very cool things come out and its just simply out of reach for the class.
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
And yes I do like the Brawler, I have done some builds of them for people in my own group as they loved the design.
I personally love Kata Master archetype, but it stops short or being very sweet. Dodge Deed would have been very nice.
In fact a Monk with Deeds would be very cool in general.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No offense, but I think he was being sarcastic.role play works out well until you don't actually fill in your roll. and roll play isn't neccissary for specific classes. lore warden - monk, dirty trick fighter - rogue, etc. i like making rogueish characters out of fighters because I can wear bigger armor and still sneak pretty well.
also, the only thing I can actually say the monk is brokenly OP at, is tanking, but most encounters die quick enough that this usually isn't a prime job in PF. I mean if you build them right, they're simply untouchable.
I was, but it is a sentiment that seems to come up surprisingly often so it's understandable it could be taken at face value.
But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.First things first, nobody hates the monk. It hasn't lived up to everyone's expectations, certainly, but there's no reason to take that personally or ascribe it to malice. It's a tricky bit of design space that's trying to do a lot of different things at once.
As to the brawler--people complained that the monk wasn't good enough at unarmed combat, so they wrote a version of the monk that focuses on unarmed combat--at the cost of the monk's mystical abilities.
And yeah, you can replicate a lot of those with UMD...if you want to spend the traits, gold, magic item slots, and actions in combat to do so :)
I am willing to say I respect the designers for their work. But it really feels like the class is being taunted because some very cool things come out and its just simply out of reach for the class.
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
And yes I do like the Brawler, I have done some builds of them for people in my own group as they loved the design.
I personally love Kata Master archetype, but it stops short or being very sweet. Dodge Deed would have been very nice.
In fact a Monk with Deeds would be very cool in general.
then play a swashbuckler and call it a monk.
then play a swashbuckler and call it a monk.But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.First things first, nobody hates the monk. It hasn't lived up to everyone's expectations, certainly, but there's no reason to take that personally or ascribe it to malice. It's a tricky bit of design space that's trying to do a lot of different things at once.
As to the brawler--people complained that the monk wasn't good enough at unarmed combat, so they wrote a version of the monk that focuses on unarmed combat--at the cost of the monk's mystical abilities.
And yeah, you can replicate a lot of those with UMD...if you want to spend the traits, gold, magic item slots, and actions in combat to do so :)
I am willing to say I respect the designers for their work. But it really feels like the class is being taunted because some very cool things come out and its just simply out of reach for the class.
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
And yes I do like the Brawler, I have done some builds of them for people in my own group as they loved the design.
I personally love Kata Master archetype, but it stops short or being very sweet. Dodge Deed would have been very nice.
In fact a Monk with Deeds would be very cool in general.
...
|
|
then play a swashbuckler and call it a monk.But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.First things first, nobody hates the monk. It hasn't lived up to everyone's expectations, certainly, but there's no reason to take that personally or ascribe it to malice. It's a tricky bit of design space that's trying to do a lot of different things at once.
As to the brawler--people complained that the monk wasn't good enough at unarmed combat, so they wrote a version of the monk that focuses on unarmed combat--at the cost of the monk's mystical abilities.
And yeah, you can replicate a lot of those with UMD...if you want to spend the traits, gold, magic item slots, and actions in combat to do so :)
I am willing to say I respect the designers for their work. But it really feels like the class is being taunted because some very cool things come out and its just simply out of reach for the class.
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
And yes I do like the Brawler, I have done some builds of them for people in my own group as they loved the design.
I personally love Kata Master archetype, but it stops short or being very sweet. Dodge Deed would have been very nice.
In fact a Monk with Deeds would be very cool in general.
The hell man? That kind of um....maneuver isn't for everyone. Next you're going to argue that since Ki abilities are mystical and I want speed, attacks and mystical powers while having a high ac, I should just play a wizard and call it a monk. I even get to hold a quarterstaff.....
Like.....seriously?
Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
Is the Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists no longer legal?
Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.Is the Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists no longer legal?
It is I think (Agile says it can only be applied to weapons that can be finessed not sure how an amulet can)
But I mean for the price of a feat not 6000 GP
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.
Slashing Grace (Temple Sword) -> Martial Versatility (Temple Sword). Bada bing bada boom, you now have dex to damage with unarmed strikes. You need to be a Martial Artist to get the Fighter levels, though.
And now for the part of this message that isn't completely stupid: no, there are actually plenty of good reasons to play a Monk. None of them are in the Core Rule Book, but they're there. Sohei, Sensei, Zen Archer, Tetori, and Hungry Ghost are all very good classes when combined with the stealth-buff Qinggong. I'd take a well-built Monk over a Fighter any day.
Martial Versatility allows you to apply the effects of a feat that applies to one weapon to apply to everything in that weapon's Fighter Weapon Group. The Temple Sword and Unarmed Strikes are both in the Monk weapon group; ergo, with Martial Versatility your Slashing Grace applies to unarmed strikes now.
You're taking four feats to do this though, which is why that part of my post was "completely stupid".
Slashing Grace is a prime example of this, one handed slashing weapon deals Dex to Damage. Dex to Damage is something Monk players have been dreaming of for a very long time.Slashing Grace (Temple Sword) -> Martial Versatility (Temple Sword). Bada bing bada boom, you now have dex to damage with unarmed strikes. You need to be a Martial Artist to get the Fighter levels, though.
And now for the part of this message that isn't completely stupid: no, there are actually plenty of good reasons to play a Monk. None of them are in the Core Rule Book, but they're there. Sohei, Sensei, Zen Archer, Tetori, and Hungry Ghost are all very good classes when combined with the stealth-buff Qinggong. I'd take a well-built Monk over a Fighter any day.
Hmm didn't know aout Martial Versatility
Yes they are indeed good Archetypes That does not make the core monk weaker
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure there is a reason to play a Monk, you wanted to play a Monk. A top knot having, sandal wearing, Kung fu (or any martial art style) bad a**. If the complaint is that other classes or hybrids can do as good or nearly as good at what the Monk can do then that's a personal problem.
Frankly if that's your gripe, then you must hate arcane spell users all day. L33T class wins..that last bit is sarcasm, or is it? *Tight shot of face, Que dramatic Music*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone talks about monk but I've still never seen an unsatisfied monk at the table, why is that? Its not like I've seen very few monks, and I I see plenty of new and experienced players use them.
They are a bit hard to kill so each attack or spell they draw is damage someone else is not taking, They can quickly disable humanoids particularly casters, which is probably the most lethal thing to a party. I've seen abuses of basically teleporting into the best places to be and disabling a big bad.
I know why monk is bad and I generally agree but can someone explain why I've met exactly one person who didn't like monk and it was because he pissed off a local pfs gm by making a monk the gm thought was too strong.
First of all the monk can be quite a beast with enough system mastery and access to a lot of books, it's the unarmed and unarmored monk that suffers.
What does a brawler has over a monk in terms of hitting and damage? They both hit at the same full BAB -2 when FoB and recieve no bonus to damage. Sure the brawler can pick fighter feats and can use his martial flexibility to have a few more feats than a monk, also being full BAB he has a lot less issues picking feats than the monk (because monk is pseudo full BAB). Even all of that don't solve the issue of flurry of misses that unarmed monks and brawlers share.
As others have said high will save is a pretty good reason to play a monk over a brawler.
|
Now I know this is gonna get a lot of Monk fans complaining but, as a monk fan, this is kinda true.
Is there any reason to play a monk? Not really unless its the specific idea you have in mind (Bald Headed guy who fights using Kung Fu)
The Brawler does the Unarmed fighting gimmick very well and with the ability to count any close weapon as dealing unarmed damage (To a max of 2d6 at level 20). The Unarmed Fighter can be made better at it as well.
Other then the mystical abilities, most if not all of which are easily done by having a wizard in your party or a load of wands or scrolls on you. Or you know have 2.200 GP laying around for a Ring of Feather Fall.
I mean to mimic the Monk a Brawler needs to take 1 trait to get UMD and then carry around a load of scrolls and wands and just make UMD checks and in fact do much better then the monk at his own gimmicks.
So is there a reason?
Honestly, No. Sadly, they're one of the weakest classes for many reasons; even with my PHD in Monk-craft. They've certainly got Style and there are some great Defensive Monks out there, using abilities and maneuvers to help mold the battlefield, but that's it. Otherwise, every other class does a better job of everything else, including Control. Not to mention the hurtful sting of them being essentially the BEST Dipping class; Master of Many Styles. Paizo just hates Monks. /sigh
Personally I play a Monk purely for the Style/Flavor, then I make it as awesome as I can. Now I'm all about some Sacred Fist(because it's definitely Monk-ish!) and take MoMS for some serious "Monk" domination! Especially after some very encouraging words from the writer of the Sacred Fist, Dale McCoy Jr!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In all seriousness, I don't put stock in which class is better dreck. Every class has peaks and valleys and in most cases the whole dynamic of it a changes with a release of a new book. Is there a reason for a Monk?
Yes, it's an iconic class that been staple in RPGs for some time now. I've played more than a few and ran the table in kills and DM frustration. Play whatever you wish when you wish it. If everyone only played the so called powerful classes parties would only be comprised of Gun slingers, Summoners and Wizards ( Arcanists now as well).
How much fun would that be? If optimization is so important there are countless mini games where that mind set is key. In role playing not so much. Just my two cents, cheers.
Again I love the monk for its flavor, but yeah flurry of Misses is an issue for every monk. Sure you can make the monk damn hard to kill but when you are throwing much weaker damage then anyone else in the party you kind of feel a little weak. People say be the Tank, but what is the point of the flurry if you cannot hit or do damage with it, at least not compared to a two-handed weapon guy who just swings wildly.
Yes you can get Weapon Finesse and Agile Amulet of Mighty Strikes
And as someone mentioned above Get Weapon Focus, Slashing Grace and Martial Versatility (But that is human only) and you also add Dex to damage.
^ Helps lower a MAD monk down to really just 2 stats but look at the cost 4 feats and a 6000 gp magic item.
Yes you can teleport and stunning fist the BBEG and let the other members of the party kill him easier, but thats not really you beating the bad guy.
I love the monk for how I imagine them, the guys who can survive and fight with only their own body and mind. (Another reason why I always gestalted them with the Psions (Lost Tradition to make it Wis focused)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I think that Flurry of Blows is second only to slow fall as the worst Monk ability. If I had my way (I made a homebrew archetype that does this that only replaces Flurry of Blows) I'd change it from going off TWF to pulling from Vital Strike. Basically you get a free Vital Strike tree, treat your level as your BAB when you make the attack action and double to quadrupal your weapon damage using unarmed strikes or monk weapons (even ranged). Since they get scaling unarmed strike damage so it threatens to do a lot. In this way instead of being encouraged to sit still and flurry the Monk is encouraged to move around. I also worded it so that it works with spring attack so they have a mobility niche. They still don't do that much damage but they can create a threat by not being around long enough to full attack.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh good it's this thread again.
Yes, there are reasons to play any class. Yes, you can often do similar things with another class, sometimes better. Yes, indeed, the rogue and the monk are often the jokes of the gaming world and exist only so other classes shine next to them.
I think that covers about everything that gets said in these threads outside of insults and allegations about someone's mom. Is this thread going to cover new ground or are all the dead horses going to get beaten?
Sorry if this seems cynical, but it is a once at week at least thing with "Does the Rogue/Figher/Monk/Insert Class Here suck or REALLY suck?" threads. They don't do much more than get people riled up, get locked, and then spawn a new thread with a similar title.
Well I ask this after the new ACG classes like the Warpriest (Sacred Fist) and Brawler do better unarmed gimmick and in the case of the Sacred Fist.. its just a simply better Monk then the Monk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes you can teleport and stunning fist the BBEG and let the other members of the party kill him easier, but thats not really you beating the bad guy.
Wait... what? A stunned creature is pretty much done. This is like saying that the Wizard who drops the BBEG into a pit didn't really "beat the bad guy".
The real issues with Stunning Fist are the overwhelming number of things that are immune to it, the fact that it hits a tough save for many monsters, and the fact that the DC isn't going to be incredibly high. If it works, you just won the combat, it just probably won't work.
Yes you can teleport and stunning fist the BBEG and let the other members of the party kill him easier, but thats not really you beating the bad guy.Wait... what? A stunned creature is pretty much done. This is like saying that the Wizard who drops the BBEG into a pit didn't really "beat the bad guy".
The real issues with Stunning Fist are the overwhelming number of things that are immune to it, the fact that it hits a tough save for many monsters, and the fact that the DC isn't going to be incredibly high. If it works, you just won the combat, it just probably won't work.
Its stunned till the start of your next turn, meaning its not stunned when you get to make another attack on it.
And That is also a big issue, wish we still had the extra Stunning Fist and those stunning fist feats that increased the DCs
If you're optimizing for Stunning Fist then you're not going for damage anyways. What you're doing is giving the rest of your team an opportunity to wail on the BBEG at whim, moving into flank without the risk of AoO's, etc.
I personally prefer the Hungry Ghost's Punishing Kick, though. It's not a trip so it works on a lot of stuff you wouldn't normally be able to knock prone, like flying creatures.
Monks have some awesome archetype options that makes the class worth it.
Building them is hard, though. You need to pump that WIS a ton, possibly dip into Inquisitor, and what not.
Playing a Monk means not optimizing for damage, but rather, battlefield utility and mobility. You want to be the guy who Stunning Fists more than the guy who pulverizes enemies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People like the class, it exists for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd actually play a monk over a brawler most of the time.
But that is because of Qinggong. Sample Monk lvl 12
Little things like barkskin, abundant step, and +4 doge with ki, help out the monk a lot. You can get some very solid defenses on a monk and some decent utility via ki. The brawler is trying to close that gap via martial flexibility and natural full BAB.
Brawler has things going for it, but I don't see how it is better than a monk. (Unless you are talking about CRB monk, at which point, why are you comparing that to an ACG class?)
|
But that is because of Qinggong. Sample Monk lvl 12
Yes - I don't think many would argue that the monk isn't quite weak sans Qinggong. Basically - Quinggong was a stealth buff for the monk.
The barkskin especially is practically required if you're going unarmed. (Otherwise your AC is behind since the AoMF is using up the neck slot where most put an AoNA.)
Qinggong is a nice Archetype, I personally always play it as a homebrew. Each day the monk selects if he wants to replace his default abilities for one of the available list and then we go about our normal day. He just chooses when he wakes up in the morning to change up his stuff, but its not a permanent loss of that ability.
But yes that build was very nice Marcus