D&D monks and their lameness :)

[Dandu]

Alternative Class Feature: Dungeon Crasher
[sblock]
Level: 2nd, 6th.
Replaces: Fighter bonus feats at 2nd and 6th level.
Benefit: At 2nd level the fighter gains a +2 competence bonus on saves and to your Armor Class when attacked by traps and a +5 bonus on Strength checks to break a door, wall, or similar obstacle.
If the fighter forces an opponent to move into a wall or other solid object when making a bull rush, he stops as normal and recieves an amount of bludgeoning damage equal to 4d6 points + twice your Strength bonus (if any).
At 6th level, the bonuses when dealing with traps increase to +4, and the bonus on Strength checks to break objects increases to +10. The damage dealt when bull rushing an opponent into a wall increases to 8d6 points + three times the fighter's Strength bonus.[/sblock]

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Interesting...PHB2?

I'd like to see what that looks like on a Ftr/?/Kensai...that PrCl's conditional +8Str boost could make that extra ugly.

 

[Dandu]

Dungeonscape.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Hmmm...don't own that one.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Not if he picks the right weapon. With a couple of feats, Greatspear becomes a monk weapon: 2d6 x 3 P, Reach, RI 10', to name but one.

And if someone gets inside his reach- tah-dah, unarmed strike.

So if someone gets inside his reach he stops being able to use his magic weapon and only gets to use the thing that was too expensive to enchant - which is why you were using a greatspear in the first place...

What you think of the monk vis a vis a fighter is your own business. I was merely addressing the issue of the cost of Mighty Fists vs magic weapons.

Yup. Fists are much more expensive to enchant unless you use weapons instead.

and there are LOTS more Str boosts than any other...

Huh?

Nothing prevents an armed monk from using unarmed strikes.

And nothing prevents a fighter from having a golf-bag of weapons either. Except cost and usefulness.

As a tangent: even with burning a feat or 2 on weapon nastiness, I'd rather be playing a monk of almost any build over most fighters in a situation where weapons (and/or magic) are not available: prisons/slave ships, in the presence of royalty, peacebonded cities, naked on a beach about to be hunted for food, and so forth.

You mean that in the edge case which utterly screws the fighter harder than any other class (no equipment) while being the optimal condition for a monk you'd rather play the monk than the fighter? Well yes. Play to its strengths and the fighter's weaknesses and the weakest class in the PHB overtakes the second weakest.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So if someone gets inside his reach he stops being able to use his magic weapon and only gets to use the thing that was too expensive to enchant - which is why you were using a greatspear in the first place...

My comment about reach was in response to a different comment.

People have made a variety of complaints a out the monks IUC, including what he can do against creatures with reach. A "weaponized" monk has the same options as anyone else, and is more capable than most of getting within that creature's reach relatively safely. Once there, he can use his IUS...which probably won't need to be enchanted, since it is the rare giant-sized creature who is an ooze, who is incorporeal, etc. (and if it is, it's like the thief vs construct issue).

Even so, there are other solutions. If you use feats from 3PP, AU/AE has one called Hands as Weapons, which permits an unarmed constant to enchant their unarmed strike. Monte Cook once said that he made explicit in his D&D variant what he felt the "natural/manufactured" language in the monk entry implied...and if you agree with him, then there's no need form the feat; just enchant the monk.

There are PrCls that grant the monk's unarmed strikes various kinds of magic weapon status, like the Kensai.

Huh

?

With all the various sources for modifiers, in a struggle to disarm a foe of like size, the Str monk has a decent shot.

You mean that in the edge case which utterly screws the fighter harder than any other class (no equipment) while being the optimal condition for a monk you'd rather play the monk than the fighter? Well yes. Play to its strengths and the fighter's weaknesses and the weakest class in the PHB overtakes the second weakest.

Every class has it's strengths and weaknesses; no class gets to shine 100% of the time.

I'll point out in addition that, unless the DM is asleep at the wheel, the wizard becomes even more screwed than anyone else once his spells are gone. A wizard who has lost his spellbook for whatever reason- and yes, I've seen it happen more than once, from both sides of the screen- is the party's #2 skill guy...and he doesn't have the skills the party wants most often.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Even so, there are other solutions.

Translation: You are explicitely acknowledging that the monk is brokenly weak in 3e.

If you use feats from 3PP, AU/AE

1: I don't normally.
2: AU involves significant power increase over 3.X. Even if I were to play wtih third party sources, AU/AE would be on the banned list unless I was playing AU/AE.

Monte Cook once said that he made explicit in his D&D variant what he felt the "natural/manufactured" language in the monk entry implied...

And that the explicit rules disagree with - and even if they didn't explicitely, that there is an item to enchant fists means the intent wasn't that you can do it normally.

and if you agree with him, then there's no need form the feat; just enchant the monk.

I don't. This comes under the heading of houseruling to deal with problems. Which is not something I'm averse to but points out problems in the RAW. (Also for the record you can not use Craft Magic Arms and Armour on a monk's fists - those fists not being masterwork).

Should the monk have the ability to have his fists enchanted as a class feature? Almost certainly. Does he? No. Should you add it in home games? Yes. Is this relevant here? No.

There are PrCls that grant the monk's unarmed strikes various kinds of magic weapon status, like the Kensai.

At the cost of the monk's high level class features. Way to go.

I'll point out in addition that, unless the DM is asleep at the wheel, the wizard becomes even more screwed than anyone else once his spells are gone. A wizard who has lost his spellbook for whatever reason- and yes, I've seen it happen more than once, from both sides of the screen- is the party's #2 skill guy...and he doesn't have the skills the party wants most often.

Possibly. Depends how big a spell loadout the wizard has and how long you keep him without a spell book. But this doesn't change the core problem. Which is that the reason your scenario allows the monk to shine is that it screws every other class except the druid with a 3" diameter diamond-tipped augur drill. (Perversely the artificer does quite well under these conditions).

 

[Stoat]

At the cost of the monk's high level class features. Way to go.

To be fair, the Monk's high level class features are kinda sucky.

[MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION]: I'm curious what level you played your longspear monk to and what splats you used.

In general, the Monk's problem isn't just that he can't easily enchant his fists/get the equivalent of a magic weapon. Offensively, he suffers the death of a thousand (or at least four) papercuts:

1. Medium BAB

2. Flurry of Blows further decreases his attack bonus

3. MAD makes it tough for him to pump the stats (Str. or Dex.) that would increase his attack bonus

4. Lack of easy enhancement bonuses to hit

I DM'ed a Monk and Monk/Druid in 3.5. Both characters had trouble landing their punches. If I were DM'ing 3.X again, and somebody wanted to play a Monk, I'd either give him a full BAB or eliminate the penalty for FoB. I'd definitely rejigger the cost of the Amulet of Mighty fists.

 

[Dandu]

Which is that the reason your scenario allows the monk to shine is that it screws every other class except the druid with a 3" diameter diamond-tipped augur drill. (Perversely the artificer does quite well under these conditions).

Psychic Warriors and Totemists would also do pretty well, if we're just talking about melee classes. I don't think any of the spontanios casters will fare poorly in a low WBL setting either.

I DM'ed a Monk and Monk/Druid in 3.5. Both characters had trouble landing their punches.

Did the Monk/Druid ever try to wildshape and literally go apesh*t on his enemeies?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

No guys see monk is fine if you take almost no levels in it.