Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nail" data-source="post: 3428536" data-attributes="member: 224">I'm confused; are you saying that your build is just as good as mine in a campaign with a moderate number of combats (lets say 2 per session)?&nbsp; That's demonstrably false.Each of my Mnk's hits do 8.5 hp of damage, each of your Mnk's hits do only 4.5...and there will be fewer of them.&nbsp; A difference of 1 in attack rolls is far more important than a difference of 1 in Init rolls, since you'll be rolling Attack much more often than Init.A typical opponent of CR 4 has 46 hp and AC 16.&nbsp; On average my Mnk kills it in 6 rounds, your Mnk takes 11 rounds.&nbsp; Almost double the time!&nbsp; Yoowch!&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious&nbsp; &nbsp; :]" data-shortname=":]" /> IOW, your Mnk doesn't contribute much to offence.&nbsp; ...And by contributing to offence, my Mnk also contributes to the party's defence.The difference in hp and AC is small ....if you'd like, we can calculate how long our Mnks would last against a CR 4 foe.&nbsp; You'd find the difference in life span is minimal.Look, don't take this personally: Mnks that are &quot;Dex&quot; Mnks tend to be poor combatants.&nbsp; If that's okay with you (and your party -- you are part of a team after all), then being a poor combatant isn't a big deal.&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Both Mnks would be.&nbsp; There is no difference there.&nbsp;Ah.How is my build like a computer game, while yours is not?&nbsp; I'm unclear on the difference with respect to the computer analogy. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I agree, multiclassing is the way to go (for a few levels).&nbsp; But the OP wanted a Monk, so....&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nail, post: 3428536, member: 224"] I'm confused; are you saying that your build is just as good as mine in a campaign with a moderate number of combats (lets say 2 per session)? That's demonstrably false. Each of my Mnk's hits do 8.5 hp of damage, each of your Mnk's hits do only 4.5...and there will be fewer of them. A difference of 1 in attack rolls is far more important than a difference of 1 in Init rolls, since you'll be rolling Attack much more often than Init. A typical opponent of CR 4 has 46 hp and AC 16. On average my Mnk kills it in 6 rounds, your Mnk takes 11 rounds. Almost double the time! Yoowch! :] IOW, your Mnk doesn't contribute much to offence. ...And by contributing to offence, my Mnk also contributes to the party's defence. The difference in hp and AC is small ....if you'd like, we can calculate how long our Mnks would last against a CR 4 foe. You'd find the difference in life span is minimal. Look, don't take this personally: Mnks that are "Dex" Mnks tend to be poor combatants. If that's okay with you (and your party -- you are part of a team after all), then being a poor combatant isn't a big deal. :) Both Mnks would be. There is no difference there. Ah. How is my build like a computer game, while yours is not? I'm unclear on the difference with respect to the computer analogy. ;) I agree, multiclassing is the way to go (for a few levels). But the OP wanted a Monk, so.... :D [/QUOTE]

Verification