Monks and AC

[Ferrum]

So, I'm honestly curious how a dex-based monk can compare to a more normal fighter type, especially a barbarian, in terms of damage - I just don't see how!

Its not about damage per hit, it's about damage per round. The Warforged you're talking about has, 2 attacks normally, maybe 3 when it's hasted, 4 if it gets lucky and can manage an AOO.

The monk can effectively make AOO's happen. A high Dex monk can tumble into the middle of a fight with ease. With a reach weapon, he can be threatening several opponents at once and then take one attack (two with the right weapons/feat/flurry). Now all he must do is wait. Wait for an enemy to close = AOO. Wait for an enemy to move away = AOO. Wait for a caster to cast, an archer to shoot, a prone enemy to stand... AOO.

One of the important things here is that the Superior Unarmed Strike is not a necessary feat with this build. The enemy should only be within 5' after having taken an AOO. With 18 Dex, monk speed, and combat reflexes, early on in the round the Monk can be in position to take advantage of the opposition's need to close or adjust position, then do this every following round, making two attacks, and setting up more AOOs.

Round one, the monk gets in between the enemy and the party, takes a reach pot-shot at the enemy, then as the enemy closes, tries to surround, or pass the monk, or does an other AOO invoking action, the Monk can take 4 more attacks.

The Fighter charges, takes one attack.

Round two, the monk tumbles/retreats, repositions himself, takes another reach potshot at the closest enemy. Then, as many as 4 more AOOs as all those mooks who got poked by the Monk in round one seek revenge.

The fighter takes two attacks, maybe hopes for a cleave. If he took both attacks, he can only make a 5' adjustment.

Yes, the fighter hits nearly every time for 20plus damage, and the monk misses half the time and only does 10 damage or so, but the monk is making 2-6 attacks per round, the fighter, 1-2. Average it out, and you get about the same damage, just entirely different styles of producing it.

 

[Zelc]

Well, if you want an apples to apples comparison, you'd need to use a reach fighter for that. Swap out that fighter's weapon for a Spiked Chain, and he loses only 3.5 damage and would likely get as many AoOs as the monk. Not to mention he actually has the option of tripping (as in actually has a strength bonus) and his Stand Stills are going to be much more effective if he wants to go the route of battlefield control.

 

[doosler]

Can someone explain to me how attacks of opportunity work? Is it true that a monk could conceivably get 6 attacks in a round using attacks of opportunity? Would there be penalties or bonuses on those attacks?

Also, I am having trouble understanding how reach factors into this. In the games I've played, I think the DM has always been fairly liberal about reach. If you want to hit someone, you just ask whether you can move close enough to attack, and then attack, all in the same round. It is pretty discretionary on the part of the DM.

 

[joshjurg]

Can someone explain to me how attacks of opportunity work? Is it true that a monk could conceivably get 6 attacks in a round using attacks of opportunity? Would there be penalties or bonuses on those attacks?

More information can be found here than one could effectively answer - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

Doosler - does your group use a grid for combat ? one thing my group has found is that more than any other edition, 3.5 necessitates the use of a grid-format map - especially for combat.



I also agree with the above post that a fighter may be able to take all of those AOO's also, but it is less in the flavor of a fighter to do so than a monk, depending on what backgrounds you draw from for inspiration.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Its not about damage per hit, it's about damage per round. The Warforged you're talking about has, 2 attacks normally, maybe 3 when it's hasted, 4 if it gets lucky and can manage an AOO.

The monk can effectively make AOO's happen. A high Dex monk can tumble into the middle of a fight with ease. With a reach weapon, he can be threatening several opponents at once and then take one attack (two with the right weapons/feat/flurry). Now all he must do is wait. Wait for an enemy to close = AOO. Wait for an enemy to move away = AOO. Wait for a caster to cast, an archer to shoot, a prone enemy to stand... AOO.

(culled)

Yes, the fighter hits nearly every time for 20plus damage, and the monk misses half the time and only does 10 damage or so, but the monk is making 2-6 attacks per round, the fighter, 1-2. Average it out, and you get about the same damage, just entirely different styles of producing it.

I am not seeing a whole lot in this tactic that requires a monk. There is not a whole lot keeping a Str based fighter build with high Dex from doing things similar to this.

- Unless the monk takes a level dip, most mundane reach weapons are martial. This means burning a feat to use the weapon without penalty.
- A Monk may use tumble to get to a prefered target. A Fighter could go with improved Overrun and just plow through the opposition.
- A fighter can go for a high AC through heavy armour and a Shield, and mitigate the slow movement by being mounted (incidentally covering a larger area than the Monk). Alternately, the Fighter can go for Combat expertise and offset the AC loss by trading on his BaB.

The only thing I see a monk having an edge on is with the high movement rate. A fighter with mounted combat helps with that, but mounts are not so handy indoors. But there has got to be more to it than that for you to be promoting a Dex monk using reach attacks. So what is it?

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Ferrum]

- Unless the monk takes a level dip, most mundane reach weapons are martial. This means burning a feat to use the weapon without penalty.

Most, yes. You'll need to go outside core to get decent options unfortunately. (I thought longspear was a weapon monks could use, but I'm not seeing it in the SRD, and don't have the PHB in front of me)

- A Monk may use tumble to get to a prefered target. A Fighter could go with improved Overrun and just plow through the opposition.

So the monk burns a feat to use a decent weapon, and the fighter uses a feat (a weak one in my opinion) to move around. Still without a mount (which is often more a liability than a benefit) a monk have far better mobility than just about anyone else. And tumble is just a fantastic skill to have.

- A fighter can go for a high AC through heavy armour and a Shield, and mitigate the slow movement by being mounted (incidentally covering a larger area than the Monk). Alternately, the Fighter can go for Combat expertise and offset the AC loss by trading on his BaB.

The fighter can easily have as good or better AC than a Monk. Unless you're talking about touch AC. And then the monk (with decent dex and wisdom) has superb saves, and evasion. Seeing a high dex/wis monk in action, they are incredibly resilient, in any situation. The movement comparison requiring a mount on the part of a fighter... I don't know about your experiences, but in 3 years of gaming so far I've only seen maybe 5 instances of mounted combat being viable. Even then, only the Paladin with a poke-mount used one (and the monk in the party was still far more maneuverable). Oh, and most mounts can't tumble.

A fighter can be a reach monster, but can't do it the way a monk can. A monk is already dependent on dex if he wants a decent AC, so Combat Reflexes and maximizing AOOs is an easy choice. High dex on a fighter who wants high AC is not as intuitive, since he'll be after heavy armor, which diminishes his dex bonus.

A build like this optimizes the monk's strengths, and avoids trying to compensate for its weaknesses with valuable resources by using natural talents of the class to go in a different direction. If the fighter optimized for this build wants to match a monk optimized for this build, he likely can. But a fighter who's trying to be a monk, should probably just be a monk.

 

[eamon]

The monk's tactics don't work well, regardless.

• First of all, you issues with bigger creatures, which just don't care about your 10ft reach. Not that reach isn't any good - but a good portion of creatures won't care much.
• Secondly, if the monk has the choice of positioning himself, he can place himself adjacent to the opponent, (within 5ft reach), or within 10ft, or within 15ft and beyond.

When it comes to positioning, in the first case, the opponent can just whack the monk and it turns into full attacks against each other. There are no AoO's! In the second case, the opponent can choose to five-foot step to close the distance and do the same (no AoO's!). He could choose to 5ft step away and use a ranged tactic if he can, or, if the quarters are cramped and he can reach another person with his 5ft step, he can do that (still no AoO's). In the third case, the opponent just ignores the meagre damage output of the monk.

Note also that a dex monk with reach weapon is really dealing pathetic damage; most opponents can safely ignore it. Who cares if the monk is dealing 1d8 damage? That's 4.5 vs. 25.5 damage. The monk can improve it a bit if he has good stats (that is, good Str, Dex, Con, and Wis), or with an expensive weapon, but it's never going to be very threatening, damage wise. And investing much in the way of feats or magic items is an expensive proposistion which the fighter can truly benefit from, but which the monk would need to spread between his unarmed strike and his reach weapon, and benefit less from in the first place (since he's a finesse fighter and needs more stat boosts to get the same effect). When damage reduction comes into play, the odds are shifted yet more towards the harder hitter.

Whatever happens, the monk is never going to be able to get multiple attacks per round if the opponent can only get one.

Finally, in all cases, the opponent can just choose to ignore the monk and head for the party. This means the monk gets one and only one attack of opportunity. He doesn't get 2-6 - unless there are 2-6 opponents, in which case he get's one AoO per opponent. And even if the monk can damage 2-6 opponents, it's much much better in combat to take out one combatant first, than to mildly weaken them but leave them standing and able to retaliate. My damage calculations for the monk assumed he would be optimized to actually increase his base damage (which is well possible even without strength using feats and the monk's belt, and thus the smart thing to do if you want to dump strength). If you're full-attacking using anything but the unarmed strike, you'll do less damage - much, much, much less damage.

Numerical comparison:
But, in case you think I'm just postulating here, I've written a program to calculate these kind of things, taking into account all possible die rolls (including criticals, bonus dice, crit bonus dice, flurry of blows, twf, penalties related to those two, optimally chosen power attack, and the exact distribution of damage dice).

In the spoiler block are the calculated average damages dealt in a single attack and full attack (and their average) of a 9th level flurrying monk, the power attacking axe-wielding fighter described above, and such a fighter without power attack. These configurations are run against AC's of 14 (when the lowest attack bonus of the monk can hit even on a 2) of up to 39 (when the highest attack bonus needs a natural 20).

[sblock]
Legend:

Optimal PA:? (the first line is the optimal power attack of a single attack)
Optimal PA:? (the second line is the optimal power attack of a full attack)
THF (weighted, SA, and FA) : the average damage of an optimally power attacking Axe, first the average and then the single and then the full attack)
NoP - same, but without power attack
Monk - same, but for a monk (FA includes flurry)


=== vs. AC 14 ===
Optimal PA:7 (+12): dmg +14
Optimal PA:7 (+12, +7): dmg +14
THF-weighted: 56.49, SA: 41.28, FA: 71.69
NoP-weighted: 39.97, SA: 26.65, FA: 53.30
Monk-weighted: 30.92, SA: 15.46, FA: 46.38

=== vs. AC 15 ===
Optimal PA:6 (+13): dmg +12
Optimal PA:6 (+13, +8): dmg +12
THF-weighted: 53.63, SA: 39.19, FA: 68.06
NoP-weighted: 39.97, SA: 26.65, FA: 53.30
Monk-weighted: 30.52, SA: 15.46, FA: 45.57

=== vs. AC 16 ===
Optimal PA:6 (+13): dmg +12
Optimal PA:5 (+14, +9): dmg +10
THF-weighted: 50.78, SA: 37.13, FA: 64.43
NoP-weighted: 39.97, SA: 26.65, FA: 53.30
Monk-weighted: 30.11, SA: 15.46, FA: 44.76

=== vs. AC 17 ===
Optimal PA:5 (+14): dmg +10
Optimal PA:4 (+15, +10): dmg +8
THF-weighted: 47.97, SA: 35.15, FA: 60.80
NoP-weighted: 39.27, SA: 26.65, FA: 51.89
Monk-weighted: 29.70, SA: 15.46, FA: 43.94

=== vs. AC 18 ===
Optimal PA:5 (+14): dmg +10
Optimal PA:3 (+16, +11): dmg +6
THF-weighted: 45.18, SA: 33.19, FA: 57.17
NoP-weighted: 38.57, SA: 26.65, FA: 50.49
Monk-weighted: 29.30, SA: 15.46, FA: 43.13

=== vs. AC 19 ===
Optimal PA:4 (+15): dmg +8
Optimal PA:3 (+16, +11): dmg +6
THF-weighted: 42.52, SA: 31.32, FA: 53.71
NoP-weighted: 37.87, SA: 26.65, FA: 49.09
Monk-weighted: 28.89, SA: 15.46, FA: 42.32

=== vs. AC 20 ===
Optimal PA:4 (+15): dmg +8
Optimal PA:2 (+17, +12): dmg +4
THF-weighted: 39.89, SA: 29.48, FA: 50.30
NoP-weighted: 37.17, SA: 26.65, FA: 47.69
Monk-weighted: 27.26, SA: 14.65, FA: 39.87

=== vs. AC 21 ===
Optimal PA:3 (+16): dmg +6
Optimal PA:2 (+17, +12): dmg +4
THF-weighted: 37.39, SA: 27.72, FA: 47.05
NoP-weighted: 36.47, SA: 26.65, FA: 46.28
Monk-weighted: 25.63, SA: 13.83, FA: 37.43

=== vs. AC 22 ===
Optimal PA:3 (+16): dmg +6
Optimal PA:1 (+18, +13): dmg +2
THF-weighted: 34.93, SA: 25.99, FA: 43.86
NoP-weighted: 34.36, SA: 25.25, FA: 43.48
Monk-weighted: 24.01, SA: 13.02, FA: 34.99

=== vs. AC 23 ===
Optimal PA:2 (+17): dmg +4
Optimal PA:1 (+18, +13): dmg +2
THF-weighted: 32.59, SA: 24.34, FA: 40.84
NoP-weighted: 32.26, SA: 23.84, FA: 40.67
Monk-weighted: 22.38, SA: 12.21, FA: 32.55

=== vs. AC 24 ===
Optimal PA:2 (+17): dmg +4
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 30.29, SA: 22.72, FA: 37.87
NoP-weighted: 30.15, SA: 22.44, FA: 37.87
Monk-weighted: 20.75, SA: 11.39, FA: 30.11

=== vs. AC 25 ===
Optimal PA:1 (+18): dmg +2
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 28.12, SA: 21.18, FA: 35.06
NoP-weighted: 28.05, SA: 21.04, FA: 35.06
Monk-weighted: 19.12, SA: 10.58, FA: 27.67

=== vs. AC 26 ===
Optimal PA:1 (+18): dmg +2
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 25.96, SA: 19.66, FA: 32.26
NoP-weighted: 25.95, SA: 19.64, FA: 32.26
Monk-weighted: 17.50, SA: 9.77, FA: 25.23

=== vs. AC 27 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 23.84, SA: 18.23, FA: 29.45
NoP-weighted: 23.84, SA: 18.23, FA: 29.45
Monk-weighted: 15.87, SA: 8.95, FA: 22.79

=== vs. AC 28 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 21.74, SA: 16.83, FA: 26.65
NoP-weighted: 21.74, SA: 16.83, FA: 26.65
Monk-weighted: 14.24, SA: 8.14, FA: 20.34

=== vs. AC 29 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 19.64, SA: 15.43, FA: 23.84
NoP-weighted: 19.64, SA: 15.43, FA: 23.84
Monk-weighted: 12.61, SA: 7.32, FA: 17.90

=== vs. AC 30 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 17.53, SA: 14.03, FA: 21.04
NoP-weighted: 17.53, SA: 14.03, FA: 21.04
Monk-weighted: 10.99, SA: 6.51, FA: 15.46

=== vs. AC 31 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 15.43, SA: 12.62, FA: 18.23
NoP-weighted: 15.43, SA: 12.62, FA: 18.23
Monk-weighted: 9.36, SA: 5.70, FA: 13.02

=== vs. AC 32 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 13.32, SA: 11.22, FA: 15.43
NoP-weighted: 13.32, SA: 11.22, FA: 15.43
Monk-weighted: 7.73, SA: 4.88, FA: 10.58

=== vs. AC 33 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 11.22, SA: 9.82, FA: 12.62
NoP-weighted: 11.22, SA: 9.82, FA: 12.62
Monk-weighted: 6.51, SA: 4.07, FA: 8.95

=== vs. AC 34 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 9.12, SA: 8.42, FA: 9.82
NoP-weighted: 9.12, SA: 8.42, FA: 9.82
Monk-weighted: 5.29, SA: 3.26, FA: 7.32

=== vs. AC 35 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 7.71, SA: 7.01, FA: 8.42
NoP-weighted: 7.71, SA: 7.01, FA: 8.42
Monk-weighted: 4.07, SA: 2.44, FA: 5.70

=== vs. AC 36 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 6.31, SA: 5.61, FA: 7.01
NoP-weighted: 6.31, SA: 5.61, FA: 7.01
Monk-weighted: 2.85, SA: 1.63, FA: 4.07

=== vs. AC 37 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:0 (+19, +14): dmg +0
THF-weighted: 4.91, SA: 4.21, FA: 5.61
NoP-weighted: 4.91, SA: 4.21, FA: 5.61
Monk-weighted: 1.63, SA: 0.81, FA: 2.44

=== vs. AC 38 ===
Optimal PA:0 (+19): dmg +0
Optimal PA:8 (+11, +6): dmg +16
THF-weighted: 3.69, SA: 2.81, FA: 4.57
NoP-weighted: 3.51, SA: 2.81, FA: 4.21
Monk-weighted: 1.63, SA: 0.81, FA: 2.44

=== vs. AC 39 ===
Optimal PA:8 (+11): dmg +16
Optimal PA:8 (+11, +6): dmg +16
THF-weighted: 3.42, SA: 2.28, FA: 4.57
NoP-weighted: 2.10, SA: 1.40, FA: 2.81
Monk-weighted: 1.63, SA: 0.81, FA: 2.44

=== Average over all AC's ===
THF-weighted: 26.29, SA: 19.88, FA: 32.71
NoP-weighted: 23.71, SA: 17.42, FA: 29.99
Monk-weighted: 16.56, SA: 8.98, FA: 24.13
[/sblock]

The conclusion from this?

• Monk: 16.56 damage per round
• Suboptimal fighter without power attack: 23.71 damage per round
• suboptimal fighter with power attack: 26.29.

Note that even in the best case, vs. AC 19 or so, a monk is still significantly behind the fighter without power attack, and just can't compete with the fighter with power attack.

Then, consider this fighter only has a bab of +8, doesn't have rage, and isn't a half-orc...

 

[Lord Zardoz]

So the monk burns a feat to use a decent weapon, and the fighter uses a feat (a weak one in my opinion) to move around. Still without a mount (which is often more a liability than a benefit) a monk have far better mobility than just about anyone else. And tumble is just a fantastic skill to have.

I am not so sure that Overrun is such a weak feat to have, but to be honest, I am just eyeballing it in this case. Forcing a 'get tripped or get clear' choice on an opponent should work against nearly any humanoid opponent. I will concede here that Tumble's static DC does work in its favor.

The fighter can easily have as good or better AC than a Monk. Unless you're talking about touch AC.

High touch AC is the one thing I overlooked here. I will concede that as being very useful.

I don't know about your experiences, but in 3 years of gaming so far I've only seen maybe 5 instances of mounted combat being viable. Even then, only the Paladin with a poke-mount used one (and the monk in the party was still far more maneuverable). Oh, and most mounts can't tumble.

I have never had a PC use tumble, and most of my combats so far have happened in outdoor environments, where using a mount is perfectly viable. Different games will create different situations. Cleave is also feat that is also either great or crappy depending on what the DM throws at you.

A fighter can be a reach monster, but can't do it the way a monk can. A monk is already dependent on dex if he wants a decent AC, so Combat Reflexes and maximizing AOOs is an easy choice. High dex on a fighter who wants high AC is not as intuitive, since he'll be after heavy armor, which diminishes his dex bonus.

I do not think you need an especially high Dex to be an effective AoO based build. With a Dex of 14, you will get 2 extra AoO. You may lose 1 point of that to AC, but as far as I know, a heavy armour does not diminish the other effects of a high Dex score (save bonus, combat reflexes benefit, etc). Beyond that, you are either fighting mobs of weak opponents, for which you would want to have Power Attack + Cleave, or your DM really hates you, and is letting every other party member get by without being attacked.

I am not saying the monk build you describe is not effective. A very high AC with strong saves across the board able to exploit tumble and easily gain position for AoO's is great. However, if your optimizing for damage output, I think a Medium Dex fighter based reach build would prove superior regarding damage output.

Also, I think the one reach build I most want to try right now would be a Fighter / Knight hybrid using a spiked chain and the Knights Challenge ability to force enemies to attack / approach you. Making all threatened squares difficult terrain and negating the 5 foot step would be deadly.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Zelc]

Most, yes. You'll need to go outside core to get decent options unfortunately. (I thought longspear was a weapon monks could use, but I'm not seeing it in the SRD, and don't have the PHB in front of me)

I'm pretty sure you have to go outside WotC 3.5 as well... IIRC? I think you have to burn a feat in order to flurry proficiently with any reach weapon (either to get proficiency or to get monk weapon status).

So the monk burns a feat to use a decent weapon, and the fighter uses a feat (a weak one in my opinion) to move around. Still without a mount (which is often more a liability than a benefit) a monk have far better mobility than just about anyone else. And tumble is just a fantastic skill to have.

A better plan would be either an MIC item that allows teleportation or some Martial Study feats to get a teleportation maneuver. Now, the Monk may still be more maneuverable, but Fighters can get to where they need to go. Which is often between the enemies and the casters. And they can keep themselves there with either Improved Trip or Stand Still.

A fighter can be a reach monster, but can't do it the way a monk can. A monk is already dependent on dex if he wants a decent AC, so Combat Reflexes and maximizing AOOs is an easy choice. High dex on a fighter who wants high AC is not as intuitive, since he'll be after heavy armor, which diminishes his dex bonus.

This is incorrect for AoO fighters, as already mentioned. For comparison purposes, we can give the Fighter the exact same ability scores as the Monk, only the Fighter takes that 18 you put in Wisdom and sticks it in Strength. They'll both have 18 Dex.

And if he really wants Wis to AC, he dips two levels of Swordsage and snags some Shadow Hand teleportation maneuvers in the process . But that's going outside of an apples-to-apples comparison.

 

[Ferrum]

The monk's tactics don't work well, regardless.

I beg to differ.

First of all, you issues with bigger creatures, which just don't care about your 10ft reach. Not that reach isn't any good - but a good portion of creatures won't care much.

True, there are foils to every kind of build. Even still, this build has the benefit against Large and larger creatures of not needing to incur AOOs during it's own approach either.

Secondly, if the monk has the choice of positioning himself, he can place himself adjacent to the opponent, (within 5ft reach), or within 10ft, or within 15ft and beyond.

When it comes to positioning, in the first case, the opponent can just whack the monk and it turns into full attacks against each other. There are no AoO's! In the second case, the opponent can choose to five-foot step to close the distance and do the same (no AoO's!). He could choose to 5ft step away and use a ranged tactic if he can, or, if the quarters are cramped and he can reach another person with his 5ft step, he can do that (still no AoO's). In the third case, the opponent just ignores the meager damage output of the monk.

Well, if you take the field as a static place, and don't try to use tactics to manipulate positioning and movement, all of what you say above is true. This Monk takes more finesse and strategy, it's not for everyone. And it won't always pull off it's reach AOO trick, but its great when it does.

Note also that a dex monk with reach weapon is really dealing pathetic damage; most opponents can safely ignore it.

I think this is where we're not speaking the same language. I'm not saying that it is a damage build. It's an AOO build that can rack up decent damage in the right situations. Its also an extremely resilient character against magic, and just a fun concept to play, especially when you know you're going to be fighting medium sized creatures in groups of 4 or more.

Whatever happens, the monk is never going to be able to get multiple attacks per round if the opponent can only get one.

Again, I beg to differ. it's all about tactics.

Finally, in all cases, the opponent can just choose to ignore the monk and head for the party.

I HOPE SO! The Monk wants to be ignored. He wants to whittle down opponents who think his damage is superfluous. if he can do that against 4 opponents at once, his impact on the battle is going to be far greater than his impact on a single enemy. If his opponents don't ignore him, they can either waste their time and energy avoiding him (giving the monk battlefield control) or they can try to close and attack him (giving the monk AOOs).

Really, a monk is not a damage machine, and this build doesn't try to accomplish that. But maneuverability, resilience, and some fun extra options can make it interesting and very useful.

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.