D&D 3E/3.5 Monk 3.5

[Nail]

Last session? No Jump Checks. Two Balance Checks each (4 players). Several Climb checks. A couple of Swim Checks. Several Knowledge Checks (assorted). Several Search checks. A couple of spot/listen checks. At least 2 Escape Artist Checks. (I'm sure I'm forgetting some - last weekend was a no game weekend)

Last session I had several Escape Artist, Balance, Climb, and Knowledge (various types) checks. Not to mention the Listen and Spot checks we all know and love.

And yet my players refuse to put skill ranks in Escape Artist, Balance, and Climb. Oh well.....

In any event, these physical ability skill checks become *much* less important as the PCs get higher level.

 

[Technik4]

In any event, these physical ability skill checks become *much* less important as the PCs get higher level.

That's one of the reason high-level characters tend to look so different from low-level characters when you are talking about 'builds'. A high-level character didn't have to go through the low-level adventures when all those physical skill checks were important (just like a high level wizard didn't have to live with his low hp and never felt the need to take toughness).

/sidetopic

 

[Pagan priest]

A Monk who is really really skilled at avoiding attacks completely is the very last person I want on my party because that is someone who likes blows to fall on his friends as a matter of habit. I want a teammate who shows good judgement on when to stand their ground and bleed -- that includes the Wizards!

A non sequitur and a contradiction in short order. Part of the point of being impossible to hit is getting the bad guys to waste resources in trying to hit you. And asking the wizard to just stand there and bleed isn't very good judgement!

 

[Particle_Man]

A non sequitur and a contradiction in short order. Part of the point of being impossible to hit is getting the bad guys to waste resources in trying to hit you. And asking the wizard to just stand there and bleed isn't very good judgement!

It is relevant if the enemies in question don't bother trying to hit you, and move straight towards the squishy mage. Maybe the monk needs to invest in the goad feat or take levels in Knight to mitigate this problem?

But that is not just the monk's issue. Tank fighters also have to worry about enemies simply ignoring them.

Though a party of only monks might be interesting...

 

[Technik4]

Though a party of only monks might be interesting...

I would be in heaven...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

A non sequitur and a contradiction in short order. Part of the point of being impossible to hit is getting the bad guys to waste resources in trying to hit you.

Only if you insist on using a narrow defintion that is not relevant to the line of argument presented.

The poster I responded to spoke of "and get out before you get hit". Given that context, the tactics are not merely having a sky high AC. When I say "avoiding attack completely" I mean that quite literally, using the RAW defintion of Attack.

A Monk who gets in the thick of things to draw attacks could potentially be very useful to her friends. A Monk who is skilled at avoiding attacks completely is a very poor contributor to the team.

And asking the wizard to just stand there and bleed isn't very good judgement!

Context.

It is not exactly rare for the carefully-protected-by-his-friends Wizard to have the most HPs in the party towards the end of the drawn out battle. Are you making a blanket statement that the Wizard should always let one of their friends die rather than take an attack that he could easily survive?

 

[glass]

...so please: Could everyone avoid arguing about Mnks and INA on this thread? Please, please with sugar on top? Just admit it's not clear either way, and move on. (If you are curious about how it is/isn't clear, I'd be happy to provide you with links to the longest threads on this topic.)

Well, I tried to do exactly that, but some still people seem to want to argue with me. Even though that there is debate is pretty much unarguable.

The SRD is VERY clear on this, the Relevant text from the Monk Class (some areas italicized for emphasis) :

I agree. I just don't think it clearly says what you think it says.


glass.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm wondering why githzerai is then so good monk race as it gives +dex.

That was actually the race of my last Monk. As a low level PC with a Dex well over 20 using a Polearm (a Bisento from Rokugan- 1d12 x2 S ), he usually acted first, he didn't take much damage in melee (with his Wis bonus, his AC was best in the party), and his AoOs softened up opponents for the Barbarian to Cleave through.

And because of his high Dex, his ranged attacks often hit home, usually making the Barbarian's path through the enemies very easy indeed. His ability as mobile artillery was better than the party spellcaster- he had precisely 1 magic item- the Quiver of Ehlonna.

(In all honesty, the PC eventually took levels in PsyWar before moving onto a Monk PrCl. Being able to use the Expansion power- TWICE- really pumped his damage output)

If str monk is so much better why not half-ogre is not doable (well they get some -stats) but at least they'd really go for the str part. Of course being large isnt that good as theres always nice ways to get it on.

They are doable (as are Anthro Monks) depending upon the campaign, but they do have their downsides.

 

[Dimwhit]

A recent "Rules of the Game" called "Unarmed Attacks (Part Two)" on 4/3/07 on the WOTC site by Skip Williams allows monks to take INA. FWIW. I seem to recall that some of his interpretations have been contested on these boards. (Long time lurker.)

You are correct. Wizard posted in the Rules of the Game that monks can, indeed, take INA.

Of course, there will always be those who say that since it's not in the official errata, it's not a legitimate rule. Stubbornness abounds...

 

[Plane Sailing]

moderator/
If anyone wants to talk about the merits or otherwise of INA for monks or any restrictions on polearm plus unarmed threatening or variations thereof, could you please link to one of the older threads on those subjects and continue discussions there.

I'd like to not see this thread bogged down in old arguments once more.

Thanks.