Atypical Monk

[Diomeneus]

I get strange looks and puzzled questions from pretty much everyone i tell about this combination... But i play a lvl 7 monk/lvl 1 Barbarian.

I personally don't see whats so bad about it, and i have a story written up to make it accurate role-playing wise (orphan taken into monastery, learned fast but shirked studies a lot [discipline]. Monastery burned down and he was forced to live in the wilds for years). I treat the rage similarly to the berserker frenzy (goes into rage when health gets low/takes a heavy hit) and i make sure he has a brutish edge to his manners.

Basically i just wanted peoples feedback on the concept. Plus any feedback of making my next two levels fighter (1 feat at 9 and 2 fighter bonus feats, good attack bonus) which will allow him to start using a longsword with flurry of blows, making him a truly unique and interesting character.

and yes he has the monastic training feat

I will edit this later to add a picture of him if it seems anyone wants it.

 

[Stormborn]

People give you funny looks because according to the Rules as Written a barbarian cannot be Lawful and a Monk has to be. Given your back story you had to become Neutral or Chaotic to become a Barbarian and thus lost ALL your monk abilities. If you want to keep your monk abilities and your backstory I would suggest that you make it Monk 7/Ranger 1 to reflect skills learned in the wilderness.

You can't flurry with a longsword even if you are proficent with it. You can only flurry with weapons specifically designated as monk weapons. From the SRD "When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham)"

Therefore do not go up in fighter, go with ranger as I suggested and take a few more levels in that using the two weapon fighting tree to do soemthing roughly equivalent of what you want.

 

[amethal]

You can't flurry with a longsword even if you are proficent with it. You can only flurry with weapons specifically designated as monk weapons. From the SRD "When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham)"

There is a feat in Eberron Campaign setting which allows a longsword to be considered a monk weapon.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Amethal is correct about the longsword-flurry.

People give you funny looks because according to the Rules as Written a barbarian cannot be Lawful and a Monk has to be. Given your back story you had to become Neutral or Chaotic to become a Barbarian and thus lost ALL your monk abilities.

Also inaccurate, though the sense is certainly there.

Ex-Monks
A monk who becomes nonlawful cannot gain new levels as a monk but retains all monk abilities.

Ex-Barbarians
A barbarian who becomes lawful loses the ability to rage and cannot gain more levels as a barbarian. He retains all the other benefits of the class (damage reduction, fast movement, trap sense, and uncanny dodge).

Even with Monastic Training you still have to follow the alignment restrictions of you classes. So if you like your Rage ability, I hope you never planned on becoming an eighth level monk or visa versa.

 

[Diomeneus]

amethal covered the longsword part (its called whirling steel strike, theres a feat for using a spear and another for using two bladed sword as monk weapons). And ya your right about the lawful thing, i forgot that our DM allowed me to make him Chaotic despite being a monk (he learned the combat training well yet had trouble with the meditation. I thought about ranger and survival ranks but in the end i favored sticking to his theme of being a diehard (also one of his feats). He lived off the wild but quite evidently he sucked at it... being unskilled in the arts of sneaking and hunting he had to attempt bigger prey that didn't need to hide, which often sent him near death and running.

I thought it was cool, i guess one of the biggest reasons its so unheard of is the whole lawful/chaotic thing you mentioned. But as a house rule it makes a pretty interesting combination

 

[Stormborn]

VGH, you are correct, thats what I get for posting first thing on a Monday morning before I am fully awake. But basically if he did take the feat that allows him to multiclass and go into barbarian it would be a wasted feat. As for the flurry with a longsword feat goes I will claim that one feat in a campaign specific book is a forgiveable oversight.

In the end, even if I got something wrong, I think my advice still stands as his best choice. Ranger instead of Barbarian to make the Aesthetic X feat worth it. That gives him LS profficency anyway and he can then take the Eb feat at 9th level.

EDIT: I see the OPs second post now. Yes saying "There is a House Rule" would have answered the question immediatiely.

 

[Particle_Man]

Well, so long as you never plan to go up in levels in Monk again, it should be ok (not sure about the longsword thing, but I don't know about the Monastic Training feat either). And there are numerous prestige classes that let you some of the monk abilities, if you do want an increase in them, without requiring you to be lawful.

But it does seem like you are trying for something like a Swordsage in Tome of Battle. Perhaps that would be a more natural fit? An "Elan" rather than a "Nale"?

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

u know i allowed a halfling monk in eberron to trade some of his ablitys for the abilty to rage
we treat it as a kind of trance summoning the sprits of there dinosaur mounts worked out well he even doned a hunt mask b4 he went into combat we had his whole order set up; like that... so u could easy twik it with your dm's help to make it work

 

[Diomeneus]

last question

So basically my only question left was "is it worth it to take my 9th and 10th levels as a fighter (human makes the multiclass work fine for no exp loss).

Essentially I lose some versatility in the long run (at high levels) and gain a flurry longsword that can be magically enhanced and weild two handed (can't use str and a half for unarmed attacks. or if there is a rule somewhere that says you can the DM said no anyways)

Differences between taking 2 levels of fighter and the 18th and 19th level of monk (as in what i lose in the long run)

+2 fort/-1 reflex/-1 will Saves
-4 Skill points
-10 movement speed (80 feet instead of 90. Our DM doesn't have us in scenarios where this would be that important often. if at all)
-10 slowfall (80 feet of slowfall is plenty)
- ethereal state (the biggest loss in my opinion)
+profiency (albeit useless) with all martial weapons and armor / shields
+weapon focus (longsword)
+improved disarm/powerful charge (haven't decided, any other recommendations for fighter bonus feats would be nice)
using a longsword two handed (large one for -2 attack and 2d6 rather then 1d8 damage) capitalizes on his +4 strength modifier and it can be magically enhanced, unlike my fists (which require feats or levels to strengthen, and even then still can't be enhanced permanently)

 

[ValhallaGH]

Your Barbarian level gives you proficiency with all simple and Martial weapons, as well as all light and medium armors and shields. So that 'benefit' is moot as you've already got it.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A barbarian is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields).

Which means two feats and +2 to one save versus another ten feat of speed (That's +4 on jump checks, don't knock it), four skill points, +1 to two saves, 10 ft of slowfall and empty body.

Personally, I'd go with the monk levels.

VGH, you are correct, thats what I get for posting first thing on a Monday morning before I am fully awake. But basically if he did take the feat that allows him to multiclass and go into barbarian it would be a wasted feat. As for the flurry with a longsword feat goes I will claim that one feat in a campaign specific book is a forgiveable oversight.

Quite forgivable. It was a good reply, just a little off on some of the facts.