Search results

I fully agree. The changes me and the DM made for our game is still under review. I have precisely zero desire to shaft the other players out of their enjoyment of kickin' ass and taking names. I just want to play a C that is like Fong Sai Yuk, demmit! Hehe.

Indeed. It could also be said that it is a reasonably good reason to change the character class into something more fulfilling a player's expectations. Fortunately, my DM watches a lot of kung-fu movies and largely agrees that monks should be like Fong Sai Yuk and Wong Fei-hung than the rather...

In the rules forum I recently said how last game session my monk felt ridiculously underpowered compared to the party druid. Me and my DM instituted some "fixes" -- primarily giving monks a fighter's BAB, so a monk can be as useful in a throw-down fist fight as a "primary melee character." It...

It was one of those things I was gonna mention, that we were fighting on a road between two fields with a few buildings nearby -- not precisely a stagaltite filled cavern. I was also going to mention that the giants had enough cover (nearby buildings) as we did. I particularly like the part...

I almost responded to Sae, again, before realizing that talking to him was like teaching a pig to sing. It wastes my time and annoys the pig. :D

Ugh, I can only imagine the horror of running with someone as dumb and uncreative as you. I'll note some things. Giants can have torches, too! And they can hide, too! Surprised? And, yeah, doofus, houses are big enough for giants to hide behind. I'm sure this shocks you. And the maximum...

This post is intensely ignorant. I've really tried not to just flame, but this is really just the stupidest thing I've ever seen. "Villages are durable." Fire, you huge, intense idiot -- FIRE. While you might not know what it is, giants do, and more to the point my GM does. My GM knows when...

It just seems to me that all the monk variant classes are very shy about giving enough class features to actually make going unarmed worth it offensively or defensively. Probably to avoid people going, "Wow! Those class features are way better than a fighters!" Yeah. I had this discussion...

I'm not entirely sure that's a good idea. I have been distinctly unimpressed by the variant martial artist core classes -- stuff like, well, yours and Midnight's defender (or whatever they call it) and what I remember from Quint. Monk. It takes a lot in class abilities to get an unarmed...

I'm already aware of this and have told my DM. I think our fix for our fix is going to be to scale back the damage a monk does at higher levels. I mean, right now, its not a big deal -- at 7th level pretty much anyone can do 1d8 in damage. But, yeah, eventually a monk does 2d10 damage and...

Neither did I! The only class to which I explicitly compared the monk was paladin, pages and pages ago at this point. However, while you did not bring up the barbarian, you entered into the discussion about it and I think it is fair to say that you didn't mention all the elements that make up...

Not to mention, Will, you're bringing up the fighter type with the lowest AC of the lot.

If its good enough for Patton, its good enough for me. And it isn't a tautology, it's a <I>contradiction</i> at worst. Though I don't even think that is the case. But, discard it. I concede my post was not particularly well designed. However, barbarians have plenty of defense -- damage...

I wasn't saying that the barbarian shouldn't play to his strengths, and I was going *with* your assumptions -- but one of the class features of the barbarian is the ability to use a shield. Using a shield *is* one of the barbarian's strengths. And damage reduction most CERTAINLY is defensive...

The DM doesn't have the book, but I've seen the Vow of Poverty stuff and . . . well, I actually like playing Rashad (aka Adamantine Moneybags, due to the invincibility of his cashflow and related issues . . . not precisely the "Vow of Poverty" sort of guy, hehe). Me and the DM have worked...

Sorta forgetting that the barbarian also has damage reduction by this time. One could consider that an important item of defense. Also, the barbarian can match the monk's AC pretty easily by picking up a shield. And of the heavy damage fighter types, barbarians have the *lowest* ACs.

But . . . monks don't really have better defenses. When the paladin was in my game (before the player moved) his character consistently had a better AC (and saves, after first level) than my monk! And more hit points. So, yeah, I think I'm falling into the camp of monks not really having...

Not really, I think. I mean, before 4th level its pretty hard to get any magic gear at all -- and the gear that can be gotten . . . well, roughly none of it favors monks. I mean, the barbarian can get his masterwork greatsword and the fighter can really escalate the armor he wears -- but I...

That's be the thing, then: IME, games don't generally last more than a year or so. Heck, one of the GMs I know has his games generally last a semester before winding them up.

To me, all these level 20 examples and illustrations are weird. I mean, I never have seen a game at these levels -- not just been in, never seen. Most games, in my experience, wind up way before level 20. To me, all these sorts of illustrations are very, very hypothetical. Which is also...