-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Issues with Summon Monster/Summon Nature's Ally (2004 Thread)
- Thread starter CPXB
- Start date
jgsugden
Legend
Hmmm ... I must enjoy banging my head against a wall ... otherwise I'd leave this thread alone.
Monk as scout: Yes, locked doors stop him. Of course, if you run into a locked door, that is usually a good time to get the rest of the party (IMHO). Scout /= Thief. A scout finds out what you're facing before the party clambers in so that the PCs can properly prepare. Good scouts can: a.) stay hidden, b.) spot things of interest and c.) get out of a tight spot. Monks do all 3 things exceptionally well.
Monk as a diplomat: You don't need a high charisma to be a good diplomat. My epic 1/2 orc rogue/barbarian has a charisma of 8 and a diplomacy in the 20s. All it takes is acess to diplomacy a a class skill and enough skill points that you can afford to grab a few ranks in diplomacy. Beyond that, the monk often has an organization behind him that provides role playing resources, but that is purely a campaign specific aspect that can't be counted upon as a balance tool.
Monk versus paladin in combat: The monk with flurry of blows does not *always* have more attacks than the 2 handed or sword&board paladin, but he does at levels 1-5 and 8-20. But at levels 5 and 6, the paladin has the same amount. 10% of the time between levels 1 and 20.
Similarly, the saving throw arguments go out the door at higher levels.
Now, let's look at these characters in combat.
The paladin, like the spellcaster, can use up a lot of abilities in one combat and be incredibly effective. He has a lot of damage dealing abilities that can deal massive damage to a foe in just a few rounds. Mucho damage against certain foes, but requiring the use of resources that, once depleted, can not be used for 24 hours or until the paladin rests.
The monk, like the pure fighter or (to an extent) ranger, deals damage consistently and evenly. The monk technically has a limit on the number of stuns he may perform in a day, but that limit is pretty high. As the day progresses and the paladin's resources diminish, the monk will be relatively more and more powerful.
Plus, the stunning fist of the monk can end a combat in one round. A stunned foe without dexterity to AC will likely not survive more than 1 rd in any battle at any level unless it is a high hit point BBEG. People keep ignoring this massive advantage of the monk (which may be traded for improved grappling, though I often find it best for a monk to have both at 1st level), though it is far from meaningless. Even creatures with a very high fort save fail 5% of the time ... If you hit them with 4 or 5 attacks in a round, you get a 20 - 24% chance of stunning them.
The BAB of the monk versus the BAB of the other melee classes: the monk falls behind. The monk trades accuracy for special abilities and a greater number of attacks. When compared to the two weapon fielding fighter/ranger, the closest comparison figure, it never falls more than effectively being 3 behind. You fall effectively 3 behind to gain a variety of special abilities.
If you want your melee fighter to do as much damage as possible on every attack roll, monk isn't your best choice. For others, monk is a fine choice. I've seen MANY games. It is clearly evident from those games that a monk can be a vitally important PC in a party. Whether he is or isn't depends upon whether the game is structured to suit his capabilities. Most games Ive played in have been well structured to make a monk a powerful PC type. If you're playing in a different style game and the monk isn't as useful, don't think of it as a default of the class. Think of it as a facet of the campaign style.
Monk as scout: Yes, locked doors stop him. Of course, if you run into a locked door, that is usually a good time to get the rest of the party (IMHO). Scout /= Thief. A scout finds out what you're facing before the party clambers in so that the PCs can properly prepare. Good scouts can: a.) stay hidden, b.) spot things of interest and c.) get out of a tight spot. Monks do all 3 things exceptionally well.
Monk as a diplomat: You don't need a high charisma to be a good diplomat. My epic 1/2 orc rogue/barbarian has a charisma of 8 and a diplomacy in the 20s. All it takes is acess to diplomacy a a class skill and enough skill points that you can afford to grab a few ranks in diplomacy. Beyond that, the monk often has an organization behind him that provides role playing resources, but that is purely a campaign specific aspect that can't be counted upon as a balance tool.
Monk versus paladin in combat: The monk with flurry of blows does not *always* have more attacks than the 2 handed or sword&board paladin, but he does at levels 1-5 and 8-20. But at levels 5 and 6, the paladin has the same amount. 10% of the time between levels 1 and 20.
Similarly, the saving throw arguments go out the door at higher levels.
Now, let's look at these characters in combat.
The paladin, like the spellcaster, can use up a lot of abilities in one combat and be incredibly effective. He has a lot of damage dealing abilities that can deal massive damage to a foe in just a few rounds. Mucho damage against certain foes, but requiring the use of resources that, once depleted, can not be used for 24 hours or until the paladin rests.
The monk, like the pure fighter or (to an extent) ranger, deals damage consistently and evenly. The monk technically has a limit on the number of stuns he may perform in a day, but that limit is pretty high. As the day progresses and the paladin's resources diminish, the monk will be relatively more and more powerful.
Plus, the stunning fist of the monk can end a combat in one round. A stunned foe without dexterity to AC will likely not survive more than 1 rd in any battle at any level unless it is a high hit point BBEG. People keep ignoring this massive advantage of the monk (which may be traded for improved grappling, though I often find it best for a monk to have both at 1st level), though it is far from meaningless. Even creatures with a very high fort save fail 5% of the time ... If you hit them with 4 or 5 attacks in a round, you get a 20 - 24% chance of stunning them.
The BAB of the monk versus the BAB of the other melee classes: the monk falls behind. The monk trades accuracy for special abilities and a greater number of attacks. When compared to the two weapon fielding fighter/ranger, the closest comparison figure, it never falls more than effectively being 3 behind. You fall effectively 3 behind to gain a variety of special abilities.
If you want your melee fighter to do as much damage as possible on every attack roll, monk isn't your best choice. For others, monk is a fine choice. I've seen MANY games. It is clearly evident from those games that a monk can be a vitally important PC in a party. Whether he is or isn't depends upon whether the game is structured to suit his capabilities. Most games Ive played in have been well structured to make a monk a powerful PC type. If you're playing in a different style game and the monk isn't as useful, don't think of it as a default of the class. Think of it as a facet of the campaign style.
However, a rogue does them better. Yes, even the dim door thing (items). No, the fact that items can be yoinked is not particularly relevant. If items are a good enough way of balancing spellcasters with non-spellcasters, they're good enough to balance mundanes with monks.jgsugden said:
However, a bard (or a rogue!) does this better. Both classes have more skill points to burn, and a bard has social/mind control abilities out the wazoo.
I think it's been quite comprehensively proved that a monk is not a combat powerhouse.
How so?
Must we?
This really is irrelevant. In the typical D&D party, you're constrained not just by your abilities, but also by those of your party members. Whatever class you may be, you cannot solo a dungeon. This is a fundamental part of the core design philosophy of D&D, and has been since the beginning.
So could any instakill spell. And besides, hoping for that one-in-twenty chance doesn't really amount to much of a strategy.
The point is: _whatever a monk can do, someone else can do better_. That is almost the definition of a second-stringer. Yes, in any _particular_ party, the monk may be the best there is at one _particular_ schtick. That doesn't change the fact that the monk is still the second-best choice. If someone else were to join the party that took over that schtick, the monk would become irrelevant.
Furthermore, as has been said many times, the monk is designed to emulate characters from a certain genre of fiction: kung fu movies. Characters in these movies, as a rule, kick butt. A monk, whatever schtick he may have, is almost guaranteed not to kick butt, relative to what the other party members are capable of. Therefore, although the class abilities may provide a fair simulation of the stunts the movie characters pull off, in truth it's a badly-designed class. It does not do what many monk players want it to do, unless the player (and the DM) put in a LOT of work to make the game more sympathetic to the class.
Last edited:
two
First Post
Part of the trouble --
combat-wise, this has already been discussed somewhat.
Basically, give a barbarian/paladin/fighter a 2-handed weapon and have them put a reasonable amount of effort into buffing their strength and their weapon.
Done.
With 1.5 x strength bonus, power attack possibilities, etc. etc. this guy is a powerhouse. Plus only 1 or 2 stats matter. Have him drop the 2-handed weapon and use a bow when necessary, or sword-n-board even on occasion. But baseline is this: 2-handed weapons are MIGHTY powerful. A stat-heavy Monk needs to burn feats like crazy simply to catch up to the barbarian w/2-handed sword. Just to catch up! They will never be ahead; more than that, they don't really catch up either. Plus, ranged combat is not a monk's forte, to say the least.
The problem might be 2-handed weapons. But, maybe not.
If/when I allow a monk into my campaign, I'll just give him fighter-like (FULL) BAB progression. To-hit is improved, more attacks faster, etc. Might be possible to keep up with a fighter (after spending feats to do it), which is OK given the monk's other abilities. There, done. My house rule.
I've never understood why monk's are worse at grappling than full-bab fighter anyway (ignoring an optional feat on the monk's part).
combat-wise, this has already been discussed somewhat.
Basically, give a barbarian/paladin/fighter a 2-handed weapon and have them put a reasonable amount of effort into buffing their strength and their weapon.
Done.
With 1.5 x strength bonus, power attack possibilities, etc. etc. this guy is a powerhouse. Plus only 1 or 2 stats matter. Have him drop the 2-handed weapon and use a bow when necessary, or sword-n-board even on occasion. But baseline is this: 2-handed weapons are MIGHTY powerful. A stat-heavy Monk needs to burn feats like crazy simply to catch up to the barbarian w/2-handed sword. Just to catch up! They will never be ahead; more than that, they don't really catch up either. Plus, ranged combat is not a monk's forte, to say the least.
The problem might be 2-handed weapons. But, maybe not.
If/when I allow a monk into my campaign, I'll just give him fighter-like (FULL) BAB progression. To-hit is improved, more attacks faster, etc. Might be possible to keep up with a fighter (after spending feats to do it), which is OK given the monk's other abilities. There, done. My house rule.
I've never understood why monk's are worse at grappling than full-bab fighter anyway (ignoring an optional feat on the monk's part).
Darklone
Registered User
Ah well. Monk vs. Paladin... hehehe. Good joke. This pallypoop hasn't even Divine Might. Har.
That said: I've seen many monks doing the combat monkey. Some good, some bad. None was as worthless as many seem to think here. Going toe to toe with a fightertype is a bad idea for a monk? I've seen 5 fights (level 1-9), three were won by the monk... two of those because of Stunning Fist. I don't understand this typical "The stun works only if the opponent rolls a 1 on his saving throw" nonsense. This might be true against hillgiants... but against a comparable NPC character with a fightertype class? That guy's lucky if he has a higher than 50% chance to save against the stunning fist.
And usually the monk can choose how to start the combat because of superior mobility. Either he waits in a good defensive position (perhaps even full defense for +6 AC), or he Spring attacks with a Stunning Fist and unleashs a full attack next round.
Combine this with the mentioned one level of fighter and a glaive... and your monk will be a combatpowerhorse. Give him Enlarge Person and perhaps he does not deal as much damage as the fighter or barbarian... but he's able to keep the baddies away from his buddies while hurting them.
That said: I've seen many monks doing the combat monkey. Some good, some bad. None was as worthless as many seem to think here. Going toe to toe with a fightertype is a bad idea for a monk? I've seen 5 fights (level 1-9), three were won by the monk... two of those because of Stunning Fist. I don't understand this typical "The stun works only if the opponent rolls a 1 on his saving throw" nonsense. This might be true against hillgiants... but against a comparable NPC character with a fightertype class? That guy's lucky if he has a higher than 50% chance to save against the stunning fist.
And usually the monk can choose how to start the combat because of superior mobility. Either he waits in a good defensive position (perhaps even full defense for +6 AC), or he Spring attacks with a Stunning Fist and unleashs a full attack next round.
Combine this with the mentioned one level of fighter and a glaive... and your monk will be a combatpowerhorse. Give him Enlarge Person and perhaps he does not deal as much damage as the fighter or barbarian... but he's able to keep the baddies away from his buddies while hurting them.
CPXB said:
I note that, in a toe-to-to fight (probably the Monk's weakest position), Rashad can Flurry, Trip Pally most of the time with the first attack, and thanks to Improved Trip *still*get two Stunning Fist attacks at Pally while he's down (at +13 to hit, due to Pally being prone). Each attack will hit 60% of the time; each hit will Stun 20% of the time. If Pally is stunned, he drops his weapon, takes other minuses, remains prone, and takes no counterattack. If not, he still either needs to get back up (a move action that will invite an AoO; your DM's judgement whether it can also be a trip (with associated subsequent Improved Trip follow-up), but it can certainly be another Stunning Fist.
That being said, I agree that Monks probably *are* weaker than some other class at everything but saves and unarmed combat, and may not be well-balanced for many campaigns.
However, CPXB, something I've been meaning to ask you that I haven't seen directly addressed: are you sure that your DM was enforcing the one-full-round casting time for Summon Nature's Ally, and the Giant's AoOs against the closing animals? If she was, then you should have had at least one round when you could attack and no animal could, followed by a round in which only the first animal could attack, and the animals should have been AoOed out of existence within a round or two.
Just one thing I run a RttToEE game. There is not front line fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin in the party. The Monk has been filling this role since about 8th level. They just got to level 13. The Monk is very effective frontline fighter and has done some memorable things. The Monk did take one level of fighter and fights with a glaive thus having reach, and with his Combat Reflexes this means when he gets next to someone they don't get away without feeling pain.
Two buffs that have proved very effective for him are enlarge (for even more reach and bumping up his damage) and Lion's Charge which allows him to charge and flurry.
Recently this monk stood in the middle of 4 Stone Giants and a Half-Fiend Stone Giant and took them down.
Maybe its because there is no Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin in the group but the group is definantly not missing the absence of one of these classes.
Two buffs that have proved very effective for him are enlarge (for even more reach and bumping up his damage) and Lion's Charge which allows him to charge and flurry.
Recently this monk stood in the middle of 4 Stone Giants and a Half-Fiend Stone Giant and took them down.
Maybe its because there is no Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin in the group but the group is definantly not missing the absence of one of these classes.
