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

[two]

Point buy monk

I forgot to mention: anyone ever played a 25, 28, or 30- point-buy monk?

You can make any other class reasonably well on these rather common point buys; the monk is however screwed.

Str: 16 (10 points)
Dex: 16 (10 points)
Con: 12 (4 points)
Int: -
Ch: -
Wis: 12 (4 points)

This is a 28 point buyer. Swap Strength with Wis, or Dex with Wis if desired. Result is either a low AC (Str=16 takes a lot of points) or a decent ac (dex,wis=16) but pitiful to-hit and damage.

In all cases, con is low, hp's low, int 8, ch 8.

It just is impossible. ANY other class, even paladin, is easier than this. Paladin can at least dump dex to 12 or 10!

If you ramp up the point buy to 36 or 40, your monk can be decent -- but at this point, your fellow PC's have Con=18, main stat=18, and well... it's not pretty. A 36 or 40 point Paladin, or Fighter, or Barb is well..pretty scary. Ditto a caster; 18 in main caster stat, high con, high dex probably. Zoikes.

 

[Scion]

I forgot to mention: anyone ever played a 25, 28, or 30- point-buy monk?

Depends on the wealth level of the campaign really, but as with any low point buy game, characters who need more than one stat at all will be more hosed that those who can get by on less

Str 14
Dex 14
Con 14
Wis 14
Int 10
Cha 10
---
28 point buy character, nicely rounded really. (int and cha can be moved around to taste). As this character goes up in levels instead of buying a weapon they will buy stat boosters. instead of buying armor they will get bracers of armor and such. In the end it will work out about the same

Not nearly as 'kill them all' as a guy with 18 str? well duh, that isnt the monks job anyway. The character given above will be able to do many things pretty well to well. If you are going to play a monk learn how to pick your strengths wisely, learn how to get to where you want to be with good item placement and feat choices. It can be done!

Sure it may take a bit of thinking and planning, but that certainly isnt a bad thing Some people even enjoy that sort of thing more.

 

[Will]

Poking my head back in, minor comment... Unless you plan on being a glaive-monk or grapple-monk, I'd stick with Str 10 and get Weapon Finesse at first level. Having high Dex is too useful for AC, whereas damage is going to escalate anyway.

25 point build:
Str 10 (2)
Dex 16 (10)
Con 13 (5)
Wis 14 (6)
Int 10 (2)
Cha 8

First point goes into Con, then everything else into Dex. Starting AC of 16. With weapon finesse, attack bonus of +3 at first level.

By 10th level, for 16k (out of a recommended 49k), the monk could have an AC of 25 (improved dex by 2, base +2 AC, items: wisdom +2, dex +2, bracer of armor +2, ring of prot +1, amulet of natural armor +1), and he'd have an attack bonus of +12 (or more, with other equipment).

 

[Darklone]

High strength monks have been much more successful IME... the high dex dudes are exactly the combat wussies people here complain about. Your AC will be bad, but you can rely on Spring attacking Stunning Fists to avoid getting hit too much.

Scion: Now the fighter is weak? Who's next, the cleric? I wait for the first "My druid is so weak, the class must be broken" rant here.

Call me stupid, give me a hat and put me in a bag, then beat it with sticks, I should have quitted this thread long ago... you guys get silly now. Teaming, I quit!

 

[Sereg]

Uhhh

Scion: Now the fighter is weak? Who's next, the cleric? I wait for the first "My druid is so weak, the class must be broken" rant here.

When was the fighter ever NOT weak? 3.0? Give me a break, are you seriously saying the fighter is a strong class? The *fighter*. Not fighter5/prc10/prc5. The *fighter*. A strong class? I really needed the laugh I got off this. ROFL. Monks and Fighters, quick nerf them before three of them band together and take the job of a single Druid.

And speaking of monk stats, we really aren't actually discussing this are we? When a class needs MORE stats to be the SAME power, that makes that class *weaker*. There's no need to debate this or give examples. Just accept it and move on. There's NOTHING to debate or argue.


Sereg

ps. It just hit me that fighters and monks are flipsides of the same retarded coin: A monk DARE NOT multiclass lest he lose his few semi decent high level abilities, and a fighter who doesn't jump ship as soon as humanly possible only gets worse and worse. Great design, good game melee.

 

[Ogre Mage]

Traps are easy to deal with -- just have the fighter set them off and keep a wand of cure light wounds handy

Heh, I don't think our party fighter would like (or live very long) with that approach. Especially the CON draining poison needle trap in the last module, the cloudkill trap we encountered 3 sessions back, or the enervation trap just last session. So much for a cure light wounds wand.

 

[hong]

Hong
You are so sure you are right you cant see how wrong you are.
Ive played with selfish people, they suck.
I do selflessthings all the time, my character lay down their lives for other character repeatedly.
Ive played clerics, done nothing but heal and been happy with a job well done. Ive been the rogue who despite totally maxed skills habitually died while scouting because the module was just that deadly. Ive been the figher who did nothing but go on full defensive while the archer behind me blew the crap out of the mooks.

And I always had fun because I was playing the game with friends. I didnt mind being a support character in combat, I contributed in making plans co ordinating people.
I dont need the spotlight to boost my ego.
You obviously do.

RIFTS PLAYER ALERT! RIFTS PLAYER ALERT!

 

[shilsen]

When was the fighter ever NOT weak? 3.0? Give me a break, are you seriously saying the fighter is a strong class? The *fighter*. Not fighter5/prc10/prc5. The *fighter*. A strong class? I really needed the laugh I got off this. ROFL.

I wouldn't say the fighter is among the strongest classes, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it (in 3.0 or 3e) other than being somewhat lacking in inherent flavor. Many campaigns don't cater to the class' strengths (versatility in combat, for one) but that's not a problem with the class. YMMV and obviously does.

 

[Will]

Well, sereg, when people are being asshats, you come sit next to me and we can chat.

Why is low-STR monk bad? You're trading maybe 3 or so points of damage per blow for 3 or so points of AC. I'd think the base monk damage, amulet of natural attacks (or whatever that thing is), and so forth would be more significant?

 

[CPXB]

Well, sereg, when people are being asshats, you come sit next to me and we can chat.

Why is low-STR monk bad? You're trading maybe 3 or so points of damage per blow for 3 or so points of AC. I'd think the base monk damage, amulet of natural attacks (or whatever that thing is), and so forth would be more significant?

Early on, though, it just sucks to have a monk without a good Str 'cause otherwise . . . well, what can the monk do?

My monk is pretty strong and his gauntlets of ogre power were one of the first things he got -- and on those merits for several levels the monk "felt" like a decent class. (It helped that the paladin's player moved to Georgia and I didn't have him there for comparison, outstripping the monk in effectiveness constantly.) I mean, without a decent strength, the monk can't hold their own against a single goblin, really.