Why does nobody complain about the monk?

[jasin]

Nevertheless, it was a reason cited by the Paizo team.

Nevertheless, it's very weak.

Besides, it's not just about monk-oriented prestige classes, but also fighter-oriented ones as well. Many of those would be available to a monk character sooner because they do rely on a minimum BAB.

That's true, and I admit I hadn't considered that.

Now that I have, I still think it's a very weak reason.

(I'm not challenging you, just saying that I don't agree with Paizo's reasoning. )

 

[jasin]

Running an E6 3.5 game set in Eberron, where the PCs are playing orcs and goblinoids (the native peoples of Khorvaire) trying to prevent the re-entry of the Daelkyr from Xoriat. They're at 6+10 now, so things should be wrapping up sometime this year.

In "present day" or in the time when goblinoids ruled Khorvaire? I seem to remember you talking about the latter.

How is E6 working out that far beyond 6th? 6+10 means they got 10 "levels" beyond 6th, right? Which translates to, what, 10 feats, spells, abilities unavailably by 6th? What's the power level of 6+10 character, compared to a 6th-level character, or a CR 6 monster?

As I mentioned elsewhere, I'm playing a regular 3.5 game (also set in Eberron; the DM is running us through Age of Worms). Playing a creepy Blue (goblin) warlock in that one.

Age of Worms was nice, even if it did cement Paizo's image in our minds rules lawyerly sadists. How far along are you?

Continuously adding to my music files for gaming... Got an iPhone now. At this point I back up so much it would take a house fire to get rid of my library entirely, and even then I'd be able to get MOST of it back... Complete loss would require a nuclear war or some such.

Eh. This just reminded me I recently noticed that DVD you sent me has become unreadable.

And you?

Been playing primarily 4E for the last two years or so, with a bit of other stuff like Savage Worlds or Vampire on the side. A 3.5 Eberron PbP game on Circvs Maximvs reminded me how much more a I enjoyed 3E, and soon after it ended I started running Kingmaker, and I'm loving it. I'd like to play some 3E/Pathfinder again, though.

I'm also, in theory, looking to expand my horizons with some of the RPGnet darlings: FATE, Mouse Guard, Burning Wheel. Still haven't actually gotten around to it.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Besides, it's not just about monk-oriented prestige classes, but also fighter-oriented ones as well. Many of those would be available to a monk character sooner because they do rely on a minimum BAB.

AFAIK, there were at least two things Paizo generally acknowledged and used as guiding prinicipals:

1) Noncasters needed help to level the playing field with casters.

2) Base classes in general needed better stuff, especially past the first few levels, to make prestige classes and multiclassing less attractive than they were in 3E.

Going with that, if Paizo had just buffed the Monk base class enough to compete with these awful, despised "broken" 3E prestige classes (which were still leagues below most casters in power, go figure), would it even matter if it was a little easier to get into some prestige classes? It's ok for any other martial character to take Imp. Unarmed Strike and possibly some other things, and trump the monk at his own game and possibly really add salt to the wound by being able to enter "monk" prestige classes early due to full BAB...but not ok for the monk to be able to enter there prestige classes at the same level the full BAB martial classes can already?

I know you're just stating Paizo's supposed arguments and they're likely not your own opinion. But...it's just so wrong.

 

[billd91]

I know you're just stating Paizo's supposed arguments and they're likely not your own opinion. But...it's just so wrong.

I just think you have to consider their point of view and goal for high backward compatibility so people could continue to use their old 3.5 stuff. If you assume that prestige classes and feats that weren't part of the 3.5 core (splatbook and 3rd party) were designed with the abilities of the core classes in mind, then they were built with the assumption that monks had a medium BAB and that may have affected they way they were designed or balanced. Giving the monk high BAB changes that assumption. The end effect may not be very significant... or it might depending on the resources the DM and players are using. And Paizo decided they didn't want to go to the effort to go there. I understand and empathize, given their goal of backward compatibility which I think is still a good goal for them to have had.

Without that goal in mind, I'm sure giving the monk a full BAB would have been on the table. Enough of the monk's special abilities (combat maneuvers and flurry) work around the difference that I'm convinced just going out and giving full BAB would have been considerably easier from a design point of view.

 

[Cor_Malek]

Um... I dunno why no one mentioned this one before, but what about enhancing protectors for hands and feet, something like bandages?

We used to have a lot of monks in our group, as one of friends was national champion in karate (juniors), and he liked to play monks in MERPG, and he continued to play them at first in DnD. It was a rather low-magic world though, so most of the time we were confined to what we could make or find. He had enhanced wrappings made of exotic materials (for the base cost requirement), at first awarded via quest by our DM, but we quickly picked up the idea, to boost him up a bit.
Even then though, the class appeared a lot weaker than what MERP made us used to (monk in Rolemaster is a damn crit-machine), and less powerful or versatile than other PC's in DnD. But at least he didn't run around with knuckles and tulips ;-)

 

[Voadam]

I just think you have to consider their point of view and goal for high backward compatibility so people could continue to use their old 3.5 stuff. If you assume that prestige classes and feats that weren't part of the 3.5 core (splatbook and 3rd party) were designed with the abilities of the core classes in mind, then they were built with the assumption that monks had a medium BAB and that may have affected they way they were designed or balanced. Giving the monk high BAB changes that assumption. The end effect may not be very significant... or it might depending on the resources the DM and players are using. And Paizo decided they didn't want to go to the effort to go there. I understand and empathize, given their goal of backward compatibility which I think is still a good goal for them to have had.

Without that goal in mind, I'm sure giving the monk a full BAB would have been on the table. Enough of the monk's special abilities (combat maneuvers and flurry) work around the difference that I'm convinced just going out and giving full BAB would have been considerably easier from a design point of view.

I'm having trouble conceiving of a monk prc that would go from acceptable to overpowered by lowering the minimum entry level by two or even three. Can you think of any from WotC, Dragon, or anything OGL? Nothing from Complete Fighter, Quintessential Monk, or Beyond Monks comes to mind as the first three monk resources I thought of. Also throw in the fact that to take advantage of this prc the character would have to forego the 1/1 BAB monk levels for that level.

 

[BryonD]

I'm having trouble conceiving of a monk prc that would go from acceptable to overpowered by lowering the minimum entry level by two or even three.

I agree. And even if you did, just agreeing that you needed the character level based on the old BAB should be a completely reasonable solution.

Beyond Monks

Woo Hoo

 

[coyote6]

This.

Something about monks having to use brass knuckles to compete just... bugs me.

As Cor_Malek said -- make 'em hand-wraps. Or hand & foot wraps, with bonus headband.

 

[Aus_Snow]

For my own tastes, the best answer is to scrap "Monks" altogether. Unarmed combatants should not be able to compete with armed combatants. Not without bringing in definite (and probably obvious) supernatural forces. Same thing goes for armour.

Unarmed fighting was a core component of the training of a "knight", sure, but it was only there as a fallback, and/or as something to add in here and there (e.g., wrestling-style moves to unbalance a foe, etc.) See Improved Trip, et al.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

As Cor_Malek said -- make 'em hand-wraps. Or hand & foot wraps, with bonus headband.

While mechanically a monk could spend an entire campaign doing no other attack than a straight punch with his right hand thousands of times, I'd rather not have a magic item setup that forces you to flavor him as only attacking with that one specific appendage. That's not what unarmed strike is. Again, why can't monk just pay 1x cost on the amulet and enhance his entire unarmed strike. All one of it, since it's all considered the same weapon.