D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a 3.5 monk?

[StreamOfTheSky]

where did you read monks can enchant themselves? If your ref to temp. buff spells, well yes, of course they can. Im talking about a perm enchantment like a +2 sword, a dagger of wounding, flaming blade etc.

Next, where did you read that Monks can move full move then get full round of attacks? I've never read/heard of such a thing. This would be a feat like POUNCE.

Eman Resu

I think Cirno meant, "this is how to fix the monk, in X easy steps."

I included both of those in my list (not move + full attack so much as chain flurry on any attack action, but similar concept), along with other things. Those two are certainly two of the most important buffs monks badly need, but monk needs ALOT of help. Full BAB, something to reduce their multiple ability dependency, and buffs to other crappy class features are all also important. The goal would be for Monk 20 to actually be worth taking. It'll never be as good as a spellcaster, but it should at least be a comparable option to Swordsage 20 or whatever.

 

[CuRoi]

You can use a longspeard to trip if you have the Improved Trip feat, can you not?

Personally, I think hacking someone's leg off is a sure-fire way to trip them, so why not a longsword too?

 

[Eman Resu]

We have a player that has his own ranking system. In this system, he compares classes to one another. Its pretty simple, just take a class with no magics, using class as written, give both classes all 18's, same level, and pit them against one another, standing at 100' apart. The challenge class is the Soulknife, no magics just his mindblade with ? enchantments. The beleif is if you cant mop the floor with the Soulknife your pc sucks...

the Monk lost, twice!

granted this was/is what this player does when arriving early in leu of twiddling thumbs awaiting the other players. I just thought it funny he said the Monk lost twice. I know feat selection is base atypical for the classes involved, but thats the first thing I asked about.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I think Cirno meant, "this is how to fix the monk, in X easy steps."

I included both of those in my list (not move + full attack so much as chain flurry on any attack action, but similar concept), along with other things. Those two are certainly two of the most important buffs monks badly need, but monk needs ALOT of help. Full BAB, something to reduce their multiple ability dependency, and buffs to other crappy class features are all also important. The goal would be for Monk 20 to actually be worth taking. It'll never be as good as a spellcaster, but it should at least be a comparable option to Swordsage 20 or whatever.

Yeah, those were intended on fixes.

Well, not fixes. The problem with monks is that you can't fix gangrene with a bandaid.

Frankly, the swordsage is everything the monk should be. It fits the fluff better, it fits the mechanics of a mystical martial artist better; it's just "the monk: now good"

 

[Starbuck_II]

We have a player that has his own ranking system. In this system, he compares classes to one another. Its pretty simple, just take a class with no magics, using class as written, give both classes all 18's, same level, and pit them against one another, standing at 100' apart. The challenge class is the Soulknife, no magics just his mindblade with ? enchantments. The beleif is if you cant mop the floor with the Soulknife your pc sucks...

the Monk lost, twice!

granted this was/is what this player does when arriving early in leu of twiddling thumbs awaiting the other players. I just thought it funny he said the Monk lost twice. I know feat selection is base atypical for the classes involved, but thats the first thing I asked about.

Okay so he ranks all non-magic characters.
Do they get mundane gear or magic gear?

 

[Eman Resu]

Okay so he ranks all non-magic characters.
Do they get mundane gear or magic gear?

I think he does everybody human and mundane armor weps and core and complete series feats...no magics usually, 100' apart in a gladiator style arena. The soulknife represents the lower middle of classes. He's told us about his little mock combats, I dont know maybe some 50 times??

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well, his testing method is so utterly not representative of how you should measure classes... That said, all 18's benefits monk greatly, so it's still amusing the monk lost badly twice. And Soulknife is not the "lower middle." It's bottom of the stack, probably around the same spot as monk and above the C.Warrior Samurai. Its entire class is replicated by a single alternate class feature for Psychic Warriors.

 

[Nifft]

Well, his testing method is so utterly not representative of how you should measure classes... That said, all 18's benefits monk greatly, so it's still amusing the monk lost badly twice. And Soulknife is not the "lower middle." It's bottom of the stack, probably around the same spot as monk and above the C.Warrior Samurai. Its entire class is replicated by a single alternate class feature for Psychic Warriors.

No.

The Soulknife sucks because it is inflexible. There is only one right way to build & play a Soulknife (which is as a single-attack high-mobility skirmisher). If you stick to playing that specific way, they're tolerably strong. They get decent skill points from a good skill list, they have high saves & HP, and they have some unique abilities. The Soulknife wouldn't be my first choice of a class, but it's a fine option for the other half of a Gestalt.

Psychic Warriors can't replicate anything except their BAB and having a summoned weapon.

- - -

Ironically, the correct way to play the Soulknife is the opposite of the correct way to play a Monk: the Soulknife thrives on charging in and then running away, while the Monk needs a full attack action to use his special flurry. I wonder if that fact affected these trials -- though these trials are divorced enough from real play that I don't much care.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Particle_Man]

Maybe another way to look at this, instead of changing the monk, is changing the game the monk is in.

For examples:

1) Assuming one goes with the "tiers" idea, what tier are monks at, and could one run a good game using only characters from that tier? As I understood it, it is not merely the case that Tier 1 is "better" for a game. Characters at Tier 1 can actually be hard to challenge as a DM. Now monks are far from Tier 1, but what is the challenge for the DM at whatever tier monks are at?

2) In general, what changes would be needed to be made (in the game rules or the game world) by the DM to have a fun game for a party consisting (for example) only of monks?

 

[Dandu]

1) Assuming one goes with the "tiers" idea, what tier are monks at, and could one run a good game using only characters from that tier?

5, and yes.