Monk Revisions

Hmmm... It seems unlikely that a bonus ability could be used against you so easily, but that's an interesting point. Oh, and I have to point out that actually, breaking through a Monk's SR should be rather difficult, since he gets massive pluses to it. And don't forget that a lot of spells can't even target Monks at that point.

I completely agree with the attrition argument as a useful Monk ability; however, that's not quite as party-friendly, yes.

Icebear: You're completely right; the argument is that a Monk is either too powerful or not. I guess I was actually just surprised at how many people posted that the Monk was not only -not- too powerful, but in fact, rather weak. (This I have a hard time believing.)

It seems to me that at this point, the matter of "too powerful or not" really is going to come down to playstyle. If you're the type who plays games that focus on lots of fighting against high-powered foes, then compared to the other classes, a Monk does not appear to be too powerful. The offensive limitations seem to keep him in check. On the other hand, a less slaughter-focused gaming session seems to favor Monks rather well, and single-player campaigns also heavily favor Monks (as someone already said, the NWN Monk is rather broken).

Edit: By the same token, though, a campaign set in an area full of anti-magic fields makes magic users less useful. It's all in how you set up the campaign, I guess.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

evilbob said:
Hmmm... It seems unlikely that a bonus ability could be used against you so easily, but that's an interesting point. Oh, and I have to point out that actually, breaking through a Monk's SR should be rather difficult, since he gets massive pluses to it. And don't forget that a lot of spells can't even target Monks at that point.
A 20th level Monk has 30 SR. A 20th level caster's caster level check to beat SR is 1d20 + 20, average of 30.5. This means that the spellcaster at that level that has done *nothing* to try to beef up their anti-SR ability has a 55% chance of beating it. That same caster who's picked up Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration will have a caster level check of 1d20 + 24, or an average of 34.5. He only has to roll a 6 or better to beat the SR of 30. That's a 75% chance of beating it. Difficult? Hardly.
 

Trine: True, but it is still relative. How many other classes get any SR at all? And don't forget that the Monk may not even be available as a target for the spell. Oh, and let's also not forget the ability to just go ethereal whenever you want. : ) That'll make it difficult to target them, eh?
 

Personally, I'd be happy if they get a fighter's BAB, a fighter's attack rate (no 6 attacks/round), real enhancement bonuses for ki strike (but maybe only for 1 hour/level?) and didn't do 1d20 damage!

The 1d20 figure alone scares DMs until they see the "monk lottery" in action.

It may be balanced to almost never land a blow but do mega-damage when you do, but it just isn't fun, and the point of the game is to have fun.
 


It takes a standard action to go ethereal though. Also, the enemy caster is just as immune to you as you are immune to them while you're ethereal. Yippee! I can stand around on this other plane for a while and do absolutely nothing, but my enemies usually won't be able to hurt me... Except for those volleys of magic missiles and other force spells.
 

Still, it's pretty coolio to go all etherial. And, there are a million implications. However, most people here seem to only think about how much damage a char can do each round. But, if you are etherial you can: escape from prisons, get past guards, sneak up behind someone, cross harmful areas, avoid traps, etc.

Sunfist
 
Last edited:

Never said it wasn't a cool and useful ability. :) It is however fairly useless if you're intending to use it in a combat situation. It's one of the best skills for sneaking around though. You're on another plane, so most things can't see you. Sure, you can't see as well either, but that's why you figure out where you're going beforehand.

The one real combat application I could see it having would be to break through enemy lines without having to face any attacks. Tumble and an obscene movement rate works for that too usually though.
 

Zephalon said:
Basically most people here base their opinion on the monk class only on it's impact in combat. And nobody can deny that the monk is a frontline fighter-type. That he isn't as good in melee as a fighter is mostly true, but neither is the paladin nor the ranger.

Rangers and Paladins far exceed the Monk in fighting potential with their full attack progression alone.

Personally I would rate Monks below Rogues for combat potential.
 

I agree with your other statements, except that I don't know if having lower average hit points is a problem when you can't be hit and spells never work on you.

Did anyone else notice how many people talked about their monks in this thread and ended their story with "... he was fun until he died."?

Low HPs hurt, because one sad day the DM is going to roll at 20 and your precious invulnerable AC goes to heck. The same with the saves. You live, up 'til the day that something goes wrong, and then you suddenly die. And, at that point, you roll up a Fighter or a Cleric or something because you dont feel like being a Monk again.

Maybe at level 15-20 my Monk will hold his own with the other characters. But its a long, long slog to that level. If your DM lets you start there, and (even better) lets you buy certain items such as Boots of Striding and Springing then go for it. You'll get your Ki Strike and your d20 damage and all the other things that sound cool. But dont start a Monk at ground zero unless you are prepared to work really hard to make yourself even marginally useful.

If nothing else, the Monk needs to be upped in power from levels 1st-6th. He's a strong contender for "weakest low-level class", he would get my vote in this catagory.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top