Issues with Summon Monster/Summon Nature's Ally (2004 Thread)

[CPXB]

Ok, let me get this right. You have a party consisting of 3 characters (since one was MIA for the night) with an average level of a bit more than 5. You are facing 2 CR 7 creatures and you complain that the Druid is keeping you alive?

Did you want all the hits from the giants to fall on you, the lightly armored Monk?

Look, summoned creatures from Summon Nature's Ally or Summons Monster Spells are around for only 1 round/level of the caster. They are there to absorb hits that would otherwise go to party members. They are there to put the bad guys down faster.

I am far more worried about my character being wholly irrelevant to fights. I mean, this fight simply did not require my character's presence. Not at *all*. I am not playing this game to merely be a fancy accessory to the druid and sorcerer.

 

[CPXB]

I'm going to have to agree with the other posters... You are trying to shine out of your element. You are a 2nd string melee guy trying to compete with the Druid's main ability.

Monks do alot of different things well... you just don't excel in any one thing.

What is a monk's element, then?

Seriously, the druid is also a "second string melee character" -- except this second string melee character is better at melee (transforming into, let's say, a lion or a brown bear) and has excellent spellcasting abilities.

Seriously, its looking as though my character has no legitimate place in this party.

 

[mikebr99]

I am far more worried about my character being wholly irrelevant to fights. I mean, this fight simply did not require my character's presence. Not at *all*. I am not playing this game to merely be a fancy accessory to the druid and sorcerer.

Sure... for this fight you weren't needed. But if your DM throws a summoner at your party next, from a distance, you'll be the one dealing with the caster, and the others will have to deal with the summoned creatures.

The only problem I see with your situation... you are trying to fill the prime melee combatant roll with a 2nd string fighter (not the class).

And the Monk doesn't really come into his own until later levels... YMMV


Mike

 

[CPXB]

Pick up a 3.5 monks belt and improved natural attack, if you havent already.

Mainly the monks job is to support whatever is going on, anything that someone is doing you should be able to help with. The ultimate fallback guy

As for making your character 'better' than the animals, he should be by default with equipment. Your ac should still be better, animals generally have a pretty low ac, your attacks should probably hit about the same though since your str will tend to be lower.

Try to get some buff spells from your compatriots, this will help you greatly. Barkskin, bulls strength, owls wisdom, whatever. Anything that they put on you for the day will wind up being better than summoning any one of those animals anyway.

Hope it goes well!

Oh, and if you are playing 3.0 definately try to get the 3.5 monks belt, if you are playing 3.5 get the buffs changed back to 3.0 versions! they just suck for everything in 3.5, whereas the old ones can still actually be good for you.

A monk's belt is 13,000gp. My character is sixth level and my GM takes seriously the whole "amount of treasure we're supposed to have" thing. I got nothing like the cash to afford a monk's belt. I doubt my GM will let me get improved natural attack, though with that and a monk's belt there would obviously be some improvement in damage capability. ;p

And, I don't feel like the fallback guy -- nor has the character, to this point, been a fallback guy. And its not just that my character is of lessened effectiveness vis-a-vis the spellcasters, but that he was really wholly useless and barring a preponderance of situations like described above with the giants protected by magic or whatever (which I suspect will annoy my GM that she must contrive situations to make my character as vaguely useful as the other characters) it is that my character is largely <I>useless</i>. I mean, by the book, those giants -- at CR 7 -- should have wiped the floor with a party of three averaging just above CR 5. And the druid wiped out TWO of them. Easily. I was just there for the ride. Hell, the druid didn't even bother to get her hands bloody in the fight.

 

[CPXB]

Sure... for this fight you weren't needed. But if your DM throws a summoner at your party next, from a distance, you'll be the one dealing with the caster, and the others will have to deal with the summoned creatures.

The only problem I see with your situation... you are trying to fill the prime melee combatant roll with a 2nd string fighter (not the class).

And the Monk doesn't really come into his own until later levels... YMMV


Mike

Excepting, of course, that druids are as good at melee as monks. And can change shapes.

Furthermore, my critique is actually that even were I playing a fighter this situation would still be there. Like I said in another post, the sixth level fighter I statted out would have actually been <I>less</i> effective in the fight than my monk.

 

[CPXB]

Why weren't you grappling and/or stunning? Ok, ok, they were giants. But in most situations you should be able to do both to great effect.

Actually, to both of those questions the answer really is "no, not really."

Many, many things you fight at mid-level tend to be in the large catagory -- meaning they are very strong, and obviously bigger, and grappling is just a damn bad option.

As for stunning fist -- well, virtually everything has a good Fort save. Humanoids, monstrous humanoids, outsiders, dragons, beasts, magical beasts, etc., and a lot of the things that don't have good Fort saves are wholly immune to critical hits (undead, constructs, oozes).

Pretty much the only monster catagory that has a bad Fort save are aberrations that I can think of.

Most critters are just pretty much immune to my stunning fist, alas.

 

[Epametheus]

I am far more worried about my character being wholly irrelevant to fights. I mean, this fight simply did not require my character's presence. Not at *all*. I am not playing this game to merely be a fancy accessory to the druid and sorcerer.

Yeah, I can understand that feeling. I played a bard in a my first 3E campaign.

Out of probably 55+ battles over the course of the campaign, I can think of only two battles past L4 where my character's presence made any difference, and one of those involved harpies.

Wouldn't a magic circle spell hedge out the druid's summoned critters?

And why doesn't your 6th level fighter have a bow? Regardless, it's better that the summoned monsters got hammered by the giants. Having the summoned dire wolf die in 2-4 hits beats the hell out of a PC dying in 2-4 hits.

 

[Scion]

Excepting, of course, that druids are as good at melee as monks. And can change shapes.

Furthermore, my critique is actually that even were I playing a fighter this situation would still be there. Like I said in another post, the sixth level fighter I statted out would have actually been <I>less</i> effective in the fight than my monk.

The fighter class, imnsho, is nearly worthless as written. He needs some major beefing up.

Druids can be first tier fighters if they want to. They are 2nd tier, at best, healers. But, with the advent of 3.5, are very good summoners. Summon natures ally isnt even as good as summon monster most of the time

Monks are mainly 2nd tier all over the place, they are good at a great deal of things, but will rarely be the best at anything really.

You have some good combat ability, but not the best. You have some good stealth skills, on par with any other class really. You have the best defenses around, with the possible exception of AC, although you have the highest potential AC.

Check out this thread, see what you think.
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=19181

I havent reread all if it in awhile, some of it may be helpful, or not hopefully though.

What is the gear value for 6th level? And yes, having that item and that feat would increase your damage potential very nicely, along with help your ac slightly. Nothing wrong with that. The feat is perfectly legitamate, and the item is purposefully designed for what you need it for. Sounds like a good combo to me! although it does take a lot of resources.

Talk with the dm, let him know how you are feeling, maybe you two can work something out.

 

[jgsugden]

OOC: CPXB, could you provide a little info on your monk? Feats? Ability Scores? Equipment?

You may want to speak to your DM about this issue. Some problems in this area arise due to DM tendencies. DMs that tend to follow the same tactics with similar creatures tend to allow some classes to shine, while limiting the effectiveness of other classes.

The monk is very well suited to getting to the back rank of enemies and dealing with a single, powerful foe. His tumble and movement make it child's play for a monk to zoom to the back row of the enemy. If the DM tends to use single creatures (1 hill giant, then another hill giant, etc ...), this advantage goes to waste.

The monk's stun attack or grapple is best used to negate an enemy spellcaster. If the DM tends to avoid enemy spellcasters, you can't get the most out of this ability.

 

[CPXB]

The fighter class, imnsho, is nearly worthless as written. He needs some major beefing up.

Druids can be first tier fighters if they want to. They are 2nd tier, at best, healers. But, with the advent of 3.5, are very good summoners. Summon natures ally isnt even as good as summon monster most of the time

Monks are mainly 2nd tier all over the place, they are good at a great deal of things, but will rarely be the best at anything really.

You have some good combat ability, but not the best. You have some good stealth skills, on par with any other class really. You have the best defenses around, with the possible exception of AC, although you have the highest potential AC.

Check out this thread, see what you think.
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=19181

I havent reread all if it in awhile, some of it may be helpful, or not hopefully though.

What is the gear value for 6th level? And yes, having that item and that feat would increase your damage potential very nicely, along with help your ac slightly. Nothing wrong with that. The feat is perfectly legitamate, and the item is purposefully designed for what you need it for. Sounds like a good combo to me! although it does take a lot of resources.

Talk with the dm, let him know how you are feeling, maybe you two can work something out.

This post . . . speaks volumes, heh. Thanks for the thread!

The DM is my fiancee and we live together. She came home about forty minutes ago and we've been chatting about this stuff and we are coming to the conclusion that all the melee fighters are sorta underpowered compared to mid to high level magic using characters.

As you said, a druid can be a front tier fighter . . . and a second rate healer. Which puts the character class far above monk, who it is generally agreed upon can't be a front tier fighter nor a front tier anything else. That thread was pretty illuminating particularly insofar as it said that monks weren't really that good as melee characters . . . but didn't really offer an example of what they were good *at*.

Furthermore, I'd say the class is definitely sold as a melee class. At sixth level, my monk has these class features -- three bonus feats, two of which are entirely melee oriented, monk's unarmed attack, flurry of blows and ki strike magic. Not to mention the boost up in unarmed damage to a d8. All of this is clearly melee related -- to be told that monks are *not* first tier melee fighters is leaving me in free fall. I think that they *should* be at least as good in melee as, oh, barbarians. Hell, I'd probably settle for as good in melee as rogues at this point (and will not hesitate to point out that rogues are useful all over the place other than fights, too).

I'm sorta feeling that druids get to be better fighters and then turn around and be spellcasters. With animal companions and other special gimmicks.

Man. I know that this is in response to your post and I'm definitely rambling (I'm sick, I'll blame that, hehe) but I'm seriously feeling that the character class is just broken -- a steaming pile of uselessness, not even good at the relatively unimportant job of melee fighting. A task to which the overwhelming majority of the monk's class features are devoted, I should add.

But I thought it was very illuminating that you think fighters are useless and druids can be front tier fighters *but not monks*.

Sorry if this feels like I'm dumping on you, I'm just sorta depressed that my character is not even vaguely what I thought he would be -- and that the class, itself, doesn't seem to have a strong place in a part (being a place that simply isn't better served by characters who are better at melee and *something else* than a monk).