How is a Monk viable?

[Thanee]

But remember if a campaign adjusts the wealth\magic level of the campaign down then the GM would need to adjust the CR accordingly.

Yep, that would be reasonable.

Bye
Thanee

 

[spectre72]

It must have, with what you have written above (like holding up alone against a bunch of giants).

Or your DM is fudging dice like there was no tomorrow.

Bye
Thanee

It was priceless when she stopped the bull rushing giant, and the dice were all rolled out in the open.

And to clarify I held the door, others were shooting arrows and such at tehm while I was doing it.

So I was not the only person in the party involved, but I was the one the giants were concentrating on

 

[Thanee]

No restrictions, but we have a group that likes to try unique class combinations. So this means that we were without a strong Wizard for quite some time.

I see. Guess it's better this way. I doubt it is much fun to have a Cleric, Druid or Sorcerer (Wizard is not so great after all, with the money restrictions) around, who is about as powerful as the rest of the party as a whole.

Bye
Thanee

 

[spectre72]

That's cool. Just wondering, why... Since I see no reason, why a monk should be a better "tank" than a fighter in the scenario you are describing, other than the fighters just doing a lousy job at their role.

Well some of it is probably bad choices on there parts, both in character design and in play.

After our game resetting TPK we have had a new group of characters built, and this group has a better compliment of character builds.

Sometimes people do things for Role Playing purposes which are fun and interesting, but a whole party built like that can be disasterous.

So now we have a "Tank" that is a tank, and not a fighter X /Cleric X / Prestige Class X type of thing with no focus.

We have also convinced the GM to increase the Magic / Wealth level a little bit to get a little more toward the norm.

As this happens I am sure my monk will become less potent, but she has had a good 10 levels

 

[Darklone]

Elder-Bas: Just a minor nitpick (and I do agree with the rest of your arguments): How should a level 1 wizard buy a masterwork buckler ?

I keep hearing that argument of the monks in the movies pretty often. But what do we see there? One guy who lays the smackdown to hordes of unarmored mooks.

The D&D monks are as good as the movie monks... just how often do these movie monks encounter knights in medieval European platemail ?

 

[Will]

The problem with 'just adjust the CR' is that stripping down equipment doesn't reduce power evenly, which is the point of previous comments.

When equipment is rare, characters who do not depend as much on equipment (because of restriction or lack of proficiencies) will become more powerful than those who do. So monks, who can't use many weapons or armors, will become relatively more powerful than fighters, who lack certain abilities in exchange for their talent at using weapons and armor. Similarly, casters, who can 'do magic,' don't suffer the lack of magic items as much as those who like to use potions.

There are related problems. For example, games where single encounters per game-day are the norm are going to highly favor clerics and wizards. Games with many encounters per game-day and time pressure for adventures are going to favor sorcerers. Games with little downtime or access to civilization will diminish the power of wizards (who need time to scribe) and crafters.

These issues can't easily be solved by direct CR adjustment.

 

[spectre72]

The problem with 'just adjust the CR' is that stripping down equipment doesn't reduce power evenly, which is the point of previous comments.

When equipment is rare, characters who do not depend as much on equipment (because of restriction or lack of proficiencies) will become more powerful than those who do. So monks, who can't use many weapons or armors, will become relatively more powerful than fighters, who lack certain abilities in exchange for their talent at using weapons and armor. Similarly, casters, who can 'do magic,' don't suffer the lack of magic items as much as those who like to use potions.

There are related problems. For example, games where single encounters per game-day are the norm are going to highly favor clerics and wizards. Games with many encounters per game-day and time pressure for adventures are going to favor sorcerers. Games with little downtime or access to civilization will diminish the power of wizards (who need time to scribe) and crafters.

These issues can't easily be solved by direct CR adjustment.

Which is all true, and the domain of the DM in the campaign.

There are no concrete formula for this type of adjustment, but putting characters in a low money/magic item world up against creatures without adjusting the CR somewhat will result in a TPK, and it did.

We are usually fighting many encounters per day with multiple opponents since we are in the middle of an invasion by demons, devils, giants, and humanoids. There is very little time between encounters, and much of the world is wilderness. There is also almost no time for crafting items, and training is often a problem for classes like wizards who need time to scribe new scrolls.

In fact the main stronghold of magical knowledge was recently overrun by demons as part of the invasion and much of the magical knowledge was destroyed or taken.

I have to give the DM a hand since we are seriously challenged, but you are right it is a juggeling act.

I am not going to suggest that my character I have described will work in every situation, but a blanket statement that monks are worthless is not true.

You need to look at the campaign you will be playing in and deciding for yourself if a monk will be a viable addition to the party.

 

[spectre72]

Okay what am i not understanding about how to play a monk? They are a melee class that has to operate with ridiculously low AC. With standard point buy the highest you can reasonably get it is 14. Combined with their average hit die i dont see how a monk could survive an encounter.

I have tried to show that monk is playable.

A monk is very tough for the first couple of levels, and is very easy to kill (just like every other character).

The usefullness of the monk will also be very dependant upon the type of campaign you are playing in.

You also have to be very carefull and know when enough is enough, and when to enter melee and when not to.

 

[Will]

I think the issue is, partly, that a fighter can be played kind of simple and do a passable job. This becomes less true at higher levels.

A monk doesn't have the same tolerance for error, at lower levels.

Both work best when really using every tool at their disposal (bull rush, sunder, disarm, trip, etc.).

 

[Meloncov]

If you don't think the monk is vaiable, your DM isn't evil enough.