Monk To Hit- I don't get it, weak?

[UngeheuerLich]

You really should not compare monk to hit with the rogue. Also you should see that the monk has high mobility and can attack FRW. If he chose only powers which attack For, he should seriously think about belee training dex to make base attacks vs monsters that have high fort.

IMHO the restriction to only 2 at wills hurts implement users as they can´t cover all defenses...

 

[Jhaelen]

Also rogues are very accurate, with that dagger bonus. But they're usually attacking AC.

Imho, rogues are the most accurate class, period (okay, maybe avengers can compete when making two attack rolls). I noticed this when building an epic level party to investigate the problem of 'unhittable' epic monsters (and found it doesn't exist - at least as far as rogues are concerned).

Rogues also have nice powers targetting Reflex.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Rogues are accurate. It's what they do. Monks should be attacking the weakest NAD where possible. (Not normally Fort).

 

[Goonalan]

Once again I see what you're saying but the monsters the PCs are fighting Have ACs as high as 32 (for the big bad guys), Fort for the Brutes higher (I think), but you know what I'm saying, average other stats for the run-of-the-mills enemies 25-28. And don't say that this is too high because the PCs are slaughtering them, save the Monk of course.

This isn't something the PCs have just arrived at, there's been no step up, in the previous scenario there was a Level 14 Brute Solo, Level 16 Soldiers- my players are hard core bad ass. What I'm saying is the guys have built up to this- we have two Fighters, a Cleric, a Mage, an Assassin and now the Monk.

I'm comparing a Monk to a Rogue because that was the change we made, they're both Strikers, yes they have other flavours- which are great but in the game we play they both end up in combat eventually and toe-to-toe- which means that some comparison should be made...

So I genuinely need to House Rule it some how- put back the +3 for his Weapon Bonus because otherwise he goes.

Honestly I've had four sessions, in what is an absolutely cracking campaign, in which one player has just been bored out of his skull (for the combat moments), roll dice- miss, roll dice- miss.

I'm not reconfiguring the encounters because everyone else is hitting 50% of the time. I build my scenarios from modules into Maptools, leveling up creatures using the Tools, all the PCs have been built using the Character Builder- it's all official TM.

And in combat, from 20 hours play, the Monk isn't cutting it, never mind comparing him to the Rogue, compared to the Cleric he's missing.

I take it then nobody else has experienced this, anybody playing a Monk?

My players don't analyse the enemies ahead of them, they don't say- ahh a Dragonborn, I should attack it's... whatever, they just dive in- sorry about that but that's the way it is. They do say- I deliver a roundhouse kick while screaming "in your face muddy-funster"; and for me the last one beats the first.

Via Skype at times, and with a global game, we often are a little limited- having to repeat lots of stuff, we do the best we can.

Anyway... House Rule? Suggestions?

 

[Blackbrrd]

Give him +3 to attack and let all his attacks target AC instead of Reflex, Fortitude and Will defense.

Personally I would rather target Reflex than attack AC with a +3 bonus when attacking soldiers. Attacks against Fort is something I would avoid.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Strange how he misses more than 50% aganst attacks vs 25 with a +14 bonus... A Rogue would hit AC 32 only with a 14 or higher.

Maybe try to describe your monsters using words like. A tough guy. A slender and fast guy. A smart guy or a strong guy. A confident guy. This will allow your players to adapt to the situation, just as a dagger wielding rogue qould favour piercing strike over sly flourish if you describe someone as heavily armored guy.

Also you could describe missed effects in such a way: When you kicked him in the face, he didn´t even bother to evade it, just taking the blow which seemed to have no effect at all. You see it all the time in martial arts films.

A general tip: don´t try to push around or knock prone tough guys. Even when you describe an attack as player, you should not be able to get away with worst tacticsall the time. If your player insists on going against higher level brutes with fort attacks, its his own fault.

And if the solo is a brute, just use base attacks and get some melee training. Your weapon is quite good and serves you well as an attack, you can even use your movement technique while attacking with a base attack.

 

[Trevelyan]

The Monk hit once last session- five hours (four combat encounters), a one off you say.

I've just read through this again before posting, it's much much less than 50% of the Rogue's hits, remembering back (and I've got copious notes), the Monk failed to hit at all in at least five combats in the last 4 sessions. We spent two entire sessions cheering his attack rolls.

Are you absolutely certain that ther hasn't been a mix up such that either the DM or the player is checking the Monk's hit rolls vs. AC instead of Fort/Ref/Will?

 

[Neonchameleon]

Are you absolutely certain that ther hasn't been a mix up such that either the DM or the player is checking the Monk's hit rolls vs. AC instead of Fort/Ref/Will?

Seriously, it sounds as if someone's either messing up the mechanics big time or their dice need introducing to a hammer.

 

[Piratecat]

Strange how he misses more than 50% aganst attacks vs 25 with a +14 bonus... A Rogue would hit AC 32 only with a 14 or higher.

It does happen - last game I needed a 10 to hit and missed 12 consecutive attacks. The odds against that happening are 14,705 to 1.

 

[Delgar]

Damnit Piratecat, don't tell me the odds!

It does happen - last game I needed a 10 to hit and missed 12 consecutive attacks. The odds against that happening are 14,705 to 1.