jgsugden said:
I used the word actual for a reason. Those were real characters. In this instance, the longsword had a number of other abilities. Of course, the monk didn't even have fire going for it, though it is easy for a monk to get flame damage for his attacks via a ring of spell storing and (heightened) produce flame spells from the druid (or other tactics).
I don't really know why a ring of spell storing is that relevant. Anyone can use one, not just the monk, so it all cancels out. Not to mention that a produce flame from a ring of spell storing lasts all of 1 minute, and gives you one attack.
And let's not forget the exhalted monk feats ...
1. Vow of Poverty is st00pid, kthx. 2. If you want to include exalted feats, everyone else can get those too. 3. Going outside core opens up a whole can o' worms.
You get 3 attacks at your best AB. Against these foes, additional spells (prayer, etc ..) would be advised. But, as I mentioned, going after high AC foes is not a strength of the monk. You're entirely correct that it lacks in that department. It makes up for it in its effectiveness against lower AC monsters. I've played in a dozen or so high level campaigns in the past two years. In each of them, ACs above 25 were reserved for powerful BBEGs. Most enemies had a lower AC. Even though the monk was not playing to his strength against those BBEGs, he was still effective.
And see, that's the thing: the fights against BBEGs tend to be the ones that capture the imagination, and it's those fights where the monk tends to get shaded most of all. Yes, being able to beat up mooks has its uses, but it's not the same, and besides which, everyone else (bar a few exceptions) can also beat up mooks: it's not like it's usually a tough job. As said before, everything a monk can do, someone else can probably do better. The exception might be being able to survive, but past a certain point, that just gets boring.
PA is one of the most effective feats for any melee character that can benefit from it (not light weapon folks, but everyone else). Perhaps poor feat choices play a part in your poor perception of monks?
Monks do not exactly have a lot of feats to start with, even counting the bonus stuff they get. What you call "poor feat choices" I call "having to make compromises in organic play".
Monk is also optimized for defense. This monk did nothing special to improve his defense. I constantly question why he hasn't done the basics to get his AC up into the 40s and play off of the strengths of the monk ...
Perhaps because he also realises that past a certain point, concentrating solely on being able to soak up the crap isn't that much fun?
I've never seen a high level monk without PA and cleave. They are very high efficiency feats for any melee character.
Funny, I've never seen a high level monk _with_ PA and cleave. Do you play thse high-level monks all the way from 1st level, or were they made up on the spot?
Here is an example of shine: Our group came into the lair of a BBEG epic priest and his army of minions. The priest dropped a modified mass hold monster spell on the party. The monk and the cleric saved, the rest of the party was held. The monk proceeded to d-door close to the BBEG while the rest of the party was being tended to by the party cleric. The next round, the BBEG turned on the monk, but his spell failed to get through the monk's SR. The monk then proceeded to beat the crap out of the enemy priest for his first 3 attacks and then used his fourth attack at top BAB (he was hasted due to his boots) to quivering palm the enemy priest. The rest of the party had to resort to clean up duty.
That's one anecdote, which goes completely against the bulk of evidence I've seen. First, if it was a _priest_ (cleric), you probably got lucky with the quivering palm. Second, doing a generous 18-20 points on each of 3 hits (without PA) is not "beating the crap" out of anyone. While it's true that every little bit counts, any BBEG at high levels worth his salt should be able to take that damage and keep swinging. Third, if you actually got to use PA optimally in the first round of combat, that's hardly a representative situation.
So don't assume that fact. And at the same time, don't assume a fighter has any weapon he wants at his disposal,
IME, this assumption is met far more often than not. How many weapons do you really need?
don't assume every cleric knows the optimum spells to use
IME, coming up with a standard MO for a cleric is not that tough -- the trick is ensuring you have enough time to get the buffs going. Even then, something as basic as quickened divine favor + righteous might can do great things for the cleric, for the cost of just one round.
and don't assume every druid knows how to get the most bang out of his summoning and animal companion.
How hard is it to just summon stuff every battle?
You've repeatedly said monk's can't compete. I'm telling you I've seen it. If I've seen it, it can be done.
Just because you've seen it done, doesn't mean it happens all the time or even on a regular basis.
It takes *some* effort. It takes *some effort* to be effective in almost any class. You can't put your highest ability scores in charisma, constitution and intelligence and expect to be an effective monk. But, usuing just the basics of strategy and selecting the feats known to be best for melee combat, a monk is a very effective PC.
No. Playing a monk right entails having to modify one's strategy in a way that often runs counter to a player's intended role. You end up sniping from the sidelines, using Spring Attack to avoid getting hit, dishing out pissy damage (relatively speaking) and cleaning up mooks while the tanks take down the BBEG.
From a strict tactical point of view, there is nothing wrong with this. You take what resources you have, and you exploit them for maximum effect. However, it's generally _not_ the sort of role that is desired by people who play monks, and have visions of kicking butt and taking names. Saying that they should modify their intended playing style just to work around funky class mechanics is putting the cart before the horse.
And once again, just to stress the point, in certain styles of games, a monk can not compete. If the DM uses exclusively high AC foes, the monk will be at a disadvantage. If the DM uses exclusviely foes immune to stunning, the monk will be at a disadvantage. If the DM uses monsters that inflict damage if hit with a natural weapon, the monk is at a disadvantage. There are many ways to put monks at a disadvantage. If you happen to play in those games, it isn't a fault of the monk class that makes it weak.
However, it _is_ a fault of the monk class that it doesn't support the style of play often envisioned by those who play monks.
