Monks and AC

[akbearfoot]

I think I'd rather play a monk that could actually do damage, rather than plink 4 creatures for 1d8.

Sure you can avoid being hit well, but at the same time, you're not really contributing a lot.


It has been stated already that focusing on 1 opponent and downing them is much more effective than plinking 4 critters at a time a little bit each...This really really really becomes a factor as soon as the 4 humanoid mooks become 4 outsider mooks with DR 5 or DR 10. Huh my ki strike doesen't work for my longspear?


Also, the dex monk seems to be very lacking in what in my opinion is their MOST important function...to get in the spellcasters faces and interrupt their spellcasting....You CAN ready an action to hit him with your spear for 1d8. but hes going to make the conc check...You took combat reflexes instead of stunning fist so you cant stun him.

In most of my games, after wasting a round trying to hit you and failing, I'd just go around you and go after your spellcasters. Or I would ready an action to 5' step towards you and whack you if you tried to close within reach. On the occasional Natural 20 that the feral powerattacking charging troll actually lands on you, you're going to drop like a pinata at a birthday party since you have 2 huge investments in dex and wis and are probably stuck with a very low con score.


I played a githzerai monk with 24dex 18wis and combat expertise, so I know all about maximizing monk ac....He was hard as hell to hit, unless he lost initiative, in which case he almost always got hit so hard he had to flee to the back side of the cleric to stay alive. And he always failed reflex saves....go figure.

 

[Elethiomel]

Now, there's been a very important point brought up in this thread:

It's not all about damage output.

I'd like to elaborate on that. First, get Combat Reflexes - but not as the monk bonus feat. You need Stunning fist. Pump your Wis up and go around searching for low-Fort enemies to put out of combat. More often than not, this means spellcasters. Go up to them with your rogue buddy (your best friend in the whole world, by the way) and Stunning Fist that caster. Free Sneak Attack. You do 1d8. Your rogue friend does much more. That caster is now dead, and just because of you and your rogue friend.

DnD works much better when you and your fellow players play to each others' strength.

 

[mvincent]

Stunning Fist that caster. Free Sneak Attack.

It seems like standard flanking is easier and more reliable.

 

[Elethiomel]

It seems like standard flanking is easier and more reliable.

It doesn't prevent the caster from casting, though.

 

[eamon]

I've also played a monk, and it's fun to play! I don't want to suggest they're completely worthless. However, there's been statements in this thread supposing you could be a decent damage dealer, and be a reach weapon + combat reflexes tactical combatant, and have a high-AC dex/wis monk.

That's just not possible.

A monk can never keep up with the damage output of a real fighter, but if he's focused on damage dealing, he can come close, and, as Ferrum points out, in some situations you can keep up. You'll have less hitpoints and worse AC, but faster movement and better saves (and immunities to boot!). It's a viable build.

A monk can do the combat reflexes trick. If he does that, he'll need to concentrate on strength, otherwise it's a meaningless trick. You just can't deal enough damage otherwise - even if you're hitting 4 creatures. Again, this means you'll need to make concessions on dex and wis and on items for AC, and you won't have a brilliant AC.

A monk can also try to take a very high AC. This he can achieve, but it's not easy, especially not at low-to-medium levels, and especially not without non-standard things (such as a githerzai or whatnot). This monk risks being ignored by the opponent. He can still make a difference by helping others, and by judicious use of stunning fist (which meshes well with high-AC builds) and by harassing spellcasters, but he definitely risks irrelevance. Against quite a few opponents, he will be irrelevant, regardless. It doesn't mean he's not fun to play, and he might also make a great scout (helped by wis+dex synergies), but he's not going to keep up with the barbarian damage wise. He just won't.

 

[eamon]

My last game I played a Barbarian and a friend played a monk. Sometimes, but not often, he found situations where he could damage just as well as I could. Often, he was moving for flanking bonuses, agitating casters while mooks were cleaned up, using his greatest strengths tactically. I always had the option to charge up, and swing away, but often that was my only option. The monk, equipped with a few nice items, always had many more choices than my damage optimized Barbarian. That was the point.

There are no (normal, non-magical) tactics which allow a creature with reach to make full-attacks against a creature without reach without the creature without reach also gaining the ability to full attack. At some point you'll need to close to 10ft. Since you used your 5ft step, you'll need to stay at 10ft to make a full attack, and then the opponent can 5ft step towards you to make his full attack. Anyway you try this, without some extra movement (not speed, but actions which still permit the full attack action!), the best you can hope for is a full attack action before your opponent gets one.

I believe you when you say your monk had many more choices, and that makes him fun to play. He's not completely useless either. But he'll deal less damage, and flanking and agitation is usually not enough benefit to compensate for the loss of the alternative character you could have played.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I've done some heavy comparisons (and played both): a dex-based build is typically much better than a str-based one. With things like permanent magic fang +5 (9k gp), monk's belt, improved natural attack, etc., a finesse monk can do more damage than he really needs to (4d8+5 per flurry hit, without any strength). Meanwhile, the high-dex provides synergy with many other monk abilities (and still improves the monk's to-hit roll). Allowing TWF'ing with the flurry makes the dex-based monk even more preferable.

I am not saying you are incorrect, but such conclusions tend to be highly dependent on the specifics of stat generation method, campaign wealth, and availability of the optimal magic items.

MAD is usually a significant detriment to the class. Monks have the most severe case of MAD. But under some circumstances MAD can be a net benefit. Many fiddly stat-based effects means many potential ways to boost the character.

I am skeptical that your analysis is likely to prove useful for most players with PCs of levels in the 1-10 range. At higher levels there is a lot of potential for stacking up boosts. At the lower levels spending a feat on Weapon Finesse is a high cost, and the optimal boosts tend to be less easily acquired.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

If I ever played a Monk, it would only be in a party with Rogue played by someone with excellent teamwork skills.

Then I would optimize for the highest possible Stun DC.

Dex or Str as the next choice, either could work.

Spring Attack might work well, too. The nice thing about Spring Attack is that I could avoid exposure to full attacks, so my AC becomes less important.

 

[doosler]

Is there a way for us to set up a mock fight between a fighter and a monk? Eamon could play the fighter. Someone else (who knows a lot about monks) could play the monk.

Each person would design an optimal character, starting out with an equal number of points to allocate between ability scores. One restriction on the monk might be that he has to go for high Dex and Wis before pumping up his Str -- but I won't set that rule in stone, it will be up to whomever creates the character.

We'll also need a moderator -- someone who can "roll the dice" to determine whether someone hits, how much damage is dealt, etc.

Would all of this be unfeasible in this messageboard setting?

I'd be interested to see what tactics are chosen, and who would prevail.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Duels are a little fiddly.

Making a 10th level PC and calculating the average damage dealt against AC 20, AC 25, and AC 30 would give us a sense of the offensive weight of the builds.

There are a few things that are apples to oranges. The effectiveness of special tactics like Trip, Grapple, or Stun are not easily guestimated. Fighters often have Cleave, so their real damage can be boosted way up with mooks around. Also a Dex Monk that is only gets a standard attack is going to be hopeless when compared with a Fighter's standard attack.