D&D 3E/3.5 Monk 3.5
- Thread starter Tclynch
- Start date
Look, I know that if you evaluate the numbers, it is more damage (significantly, see some of my earlier posts). My point is, at the table, against monsters (say hobgoblins) what is the difference between:
Dex-Monk: Roll-to-hit, Hit!, 8 damage!
Str-Monk: Roll-to-hit, Hit!, 12 damage!
My point is they are both good hits, but I don't think the extra 4 points of damage are going to be so awe-inspiring that the harrier monk suddenly becomes a 'true threat'. Either the dm adjucates the monk is a threat or he doesn't, but in my experience DMs follow what has been occuring in combat, not what is written on your character sheet. A rogue with an early lucky crit and sneak attack damage will likely be deemed the biggest threat, until a fighter or barbarian moves in and gets a full-attack. Wizards and other robe-wearers always have a threatening aura to them, for their spell-casting hands of destruction.The monk, even a strength monk, is going to be hard-pressed to seem more threatening than those characters (so honestly, don't try too hard!).
My point is, don't kid yourself and play your role. Help the rogue flank, chase down a spell-caster, or disarm/grapple/trip/stun someone. Don't try and stand your ground and make full attacks (ala Fighter or Barbarian) because you don't have the hp or the attack bonus to make it worthwhile (except against mooks, which you can pretty much do ANYTHING and have the fight go well).
All of that is not to say that a Strength-monk is not viable, I simply don't think that becoming a strength monk to the detriment of the rest of your character is a worthy build (especially for a first-time monk). And trying to say that is the only viable build (unless you are extremeley tactical, have good teamwork, etc) irks me.
I'm pretty sure unless I was really paying attention I would never notice the difference of 20 mph. Kinda like, in the heat of battle you wouldn't notice that a monk's wounds aren't *quite* as bludgeoning as they would be with a stronger monk (although I do respect the 'low strength equates to a visually weak-looking character' argument, however anyone willing to go into battle without a shirt that manages to not get sliced up in the first round would raise my eyebrows). This isn't final fantasy with numbers popping up in front of your chest when you take damage, after all.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
Technik4 said:
Once you get past 1HD mooks, quite a bit. Level up your party to ~8th level, throw a Hill Giant and a few Ogres on the battlemat, and see how far 8 damage gets you.
I am not suggesting what you are saying cannot work, it is just harder for newbies (and veterans) generally speaking.
Your own suggestion here seem contradictory. If you are going to grapple or trip, isn't a good Str a necessity? Flanking is a great idea, but if you are not going to stand your ground that is a less useful Flank for anyone else. And if you are not standing your ground when the fight gets tough, you are giving up on a major class ability: Flurry of Blows. Flurry has fabulous synergy with a high Str.
You are giving up a lot by not having a good Str. It may feel more comfortable to pile stat resources along the class' forte, but that is not automatically the best choice.
Almost as far as 12 damage?
True. My point is there are options for monks, not all monks need high strength (especially as their highest stat), and dex-based monks can work. Standing your ground on a flank with fighting defensively is what I am advocating (as opposed to say, flurry-of-blows while flanking). That is obviously dependent on what youre facing, no need to fight defensively against goblin warriors.
Well no wonder people think the fighter is weak, if 6 damage (3 feats....weapon spec) is absolutely pointless!
It does matter, further...the dex monk has to take another feat (weapon finesse) or his offense will truly be in the toilet. While there are ways to make a dex monk viable, arguing that all that extra damage the strength monk produces doesn't matter is not the way to go.
It does matter, further...the dex monk has to take another feat (weapon finesse) or his offense will truly be in the toilet. While there are ways to make a dex monk viable, arguing that all that extra damage the strength monk produces doesn't matter is not the way to go.
Nail
First Post
Yup.Stalker0 said:
And comparing the Maximum Damage for each is also less-than-helpful; it obscures the real, down-in-the-trenches damage difference between the two builds (Str Mnk vs. Dex Mnk). Compare average damage against typical ACs to see the real difference. I'd be happy to run more numbers if anyone would like.
A Dex Mnk does less damage and needs to spend a least 1 feat to do it. Why is that a better option?
Last edited:
Nail
First Post
Another key point, RC.Ridley's Cohort said:
Heck, a few players I know could make a decent (and fun to play!) PCs out of the NPC classes in the DMG. Playing a Dex Mnk is possible....it's just harder.
BTW: Has the OP made his decisions about his PC? Let's see it! How badly did we screw him up?
My argument is that a dex-monk is a viable option, not a better option.
By all means, if you want a monk that exists for dealing-damage play a Strength monk. I am in no way trying to discourage that or imply that a Dex monk will deal more damage, hit more often, or knock out as many foes as he would were he dedicated to the strength ability score. OTOH, that does NOT mean he is completely useless in combat. The two statements are not contradictions.
It is possible to play in a campaign with a moderate amount of combat using a Dex-monk. I have done it on a few occasions to great effect. I'm sorry if the numbers won't convince you, but assuming the monk is the 5th party member (ie- you have a figher, wizard, cleric, and rogue or some analog thereof) a dex monk can work quite well. If you don't have a fighter in your group, then I'm sure nuking your Int (and thereby your stealth and athletic skills) to pump your Str will make you more fighter-y. But that 'build' is just one of many (especially if you can convince your DM to step outside the core books).
