Monks Broken or Not

[Dandu]

Also, it's worth noting that the Strong Arm Bracers are a pretty pure example of power creep... Compared to almost anything you'll find in the core rules, the SABs are a godlike item.

Candle of Invocation. Dust of Sneezing and Choking. Night Hag Heartstone. Bead of Karma.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Candle of Invocation. Dust of Sneezing and Choking. Night Hag Heartstone. Bead of Karma.

But the Heartstone loses potency after 10 uses (24 hours in pathfinder). But yeah pretty nice for low levels.

Dust and Bead of Karma are pretty powerful.

Candle is broken (breaks intent and mechanics). I'm not sure what balanced the designers used as guidelines.

 

[Dandu]

If you can make the DC 25 check to emulate a race via UMD (doable at level 10 or earlier as a rogue) you get to use the Heart Stone forever.

 

[Persiflage]

A Cha-focussed Warlock can automatically pull that DC25 check off at 4th level if they're prepared to burn a feat. In certain builds it might not even be a dumb thing to do.

 

[akbearfoot]

Doesn't the NPC monk in the DMGexamples have improved natural attack after a certain level?

Superior unarmed strike and monks belt should stack just fine...neither are named bonuses, and they are obviously different sources. Throw in a monks tatoo for extra fun. I can sorta see how it could be read that way, given some people subscribe to the notion that anything that improves 'caster level by x' also does not stack with anything else that improves caster level. I personally disagree with that translation.

Base monks of pretty much any normal race are weak compared to the other martial classes. Especially compared to pretty much anything else that just dips into monk for 2 levels. Monk 2/Psy WarriorX comes to mind.

Warforged monks with enchanted Battle Fists and the Fist of the Forest PrC are strong. Or any monk that has access to the Pounce special ability, which I think personally should be banned in games where balance is desired.

 

[Dandu]

Doesn't the NPC monk in the DMGexamples have improved natural attack after a certain level?

Doesn't the example Abjurant Champion in the Complete Mage have Mage Armor as one of the spells that benefit from the Abjurant Champion's class abilities?

Superior unarmed strike and monks belt should stack just fine...neither are named bonuses, and they are obviously different sources. Throw in a monks tatoo for extra fun. I can sorta see how it could be read that way, given some people subscribe to the notion that anything that improves 'caster level by x' also does not stack with anything else that improves caster level. I personally disagree with that translation.

What I have heard argued about SUAS and the Monk's Belt is that they both refer to the person's base monk level. The language is different for items and feats that give +CL.

Thinking about it, I think it's one of those things that could go either way. Hm, should probably edit my original post about them.

Or any monk that has access to the Pounce special ability, which I think personally should be banned in games where balance is desired.

Depends. Do you think full spellcasters are ok?

Casters get to unleash the full fury of their spellcasting abilities (which is much more powerful than a full attack) as a standard action. Why shouldn't melee be able to do something similar?

 

[akbearfoot]

Sorry to derail the thread a bit, but I wanted to reply

Spellcasters get to unleash their full fury on the world, a very limited number of times per day, mostly at a safe distance so they can protect their anemic hitpoints. Their spells are super powerful but they are balanced by their spells/day, and the necessity to use some of their magic for purely defensive purposes.

Melee types get to unleash their full fury in the form of full attacks. They can do it an unlimited number of times per day, but the balancing factor is they have to trade blows in order to do it. They can close with the bad guys and strike first(once) before they get full attacked on the monsters turn. Or they can wait and get smacked first by the monster(once) then get to use the first full attack on their turn.

Pounce essentially gives any melee type the ability 'All Full attack, all the time'. It even gives you the charge bonus to hit on all your attacks(in most cases that I know of) I'd pretty much compare that with giving a wizard the ability to use a standard action to deal 1d6/level to any target with no save and letting him cast it every round, all day long. Notice how warlocks and rogues scale at half that rate? It breaks the intended mechanic of the game to deal out huge damage, unlimited times, with no cost involved. And I'm sorry, but taking 1 level of Lion Totem barbarian doesn't count as 'cost' in my assessment. Or some way too cheap item of 'use activated' Lions Pounce.

My opinion may be flavored by the multitude of 2-h power attacking goliath barbarians and warforged FotF monks and shapechanged buffed pouncing druids doing 200+ damage a round that I have played with.

 

[Dandu]

Spellcasters get to unleash their full fury on the world, a very limited number of times per day,

You do realize that is only true for the first third of the game, right?

mostly at a safe distance so they can protect their anemic hitpoints.

Mr. Druid would like to have a word with you, as would his pet bear.

Their spells are super powerful but they are balanced by their spells/day, and the necessity to use some of their magic for purely defensive purposes.

Meanwhile, melee characters run off of hit points, which tend to go out the door really fast unless healing magic is involved. They're not exactly eternal engines of war.

Throw spellcasters through a 10 encounter a day campaign, they'll come out pretty beat. Throw melee through one? They'll come out just as bad, because they can't recharge their HP. This is a problem for people on the front line.

Melee types get to unleash their full fury in the form of full attacks. They can do it an unlimited number of times per day, but the balancing factor is they have to trade blows in order to do it. They can close with the bad guys and strike first(once) before they get full attacked on the monsters turn. Or they can wait and get smacked first by the monster(once) then get to use the first full attack on their turn.

Why is this better for balance than having everyone be able to full attack all of the time?

Pounce essentially gives any melee type the ability 'All Full attack, all the time'.

Incidentally, this works only if you're not on terrain that prevents charging. Which isn't exactly uncommon or unreasonable to encounter in games.

Notice how warlocks and rogues scale at half that rate? It breaks the intended mechanic of the game to deal out huge damage, unlimited times, with no cost involved.

But you can't charge all the time, so I guess it's ok.

My opinion may be flavored by the multitude of 2-h power attacking goliath barbarians and warforged FotF monks and shapechanged buffed pouncing druids doing 200+ damage a round that I have played with.

From my experience, Pounce isn't game breaking because having a large amount of full attacks is not what breaks the game. Hell, at the level the Druid gets Shapechange, +200 damage is trivial.

Planar binding nightmares, imps, genies, and Solars breaks the game. Using Magic Jar to take over a Balor to free yourself of your feeble meatbag body breaks the game. Gating in Epic monsters breaks the game. Shapechanging into Chokers or Chronotryn breaks the game.

Pouncing is downright tame by comparison.

Of course, this may be colored by my experiences playing full spellcasters.

 

[akbearfoot]

When I consider the option of giving new powers to players, I don't balance those powers against the strongest 3 classes from the core rules (cleric wizard druid). I think fighters are THE weakest class in core, which is sad considering how bad bard and monk both are in core.

I've never played in a game that had 10 encounters in a day, or even more than 3 or 4. In my 17 years of gaming with about a half dozen different groups It has always been the spellcasters setting the pace of the game. They say "Im out of high level spells" and the party retreats to rest till spells come back.

Give everybody pounce and unlimited high damage attacks every round and it's not 3.5e anymore. It's more like a Tome of Battle/4E. Healing Belts and really cheap wands of lesser vigor mean you dont even need a healer if nobody wants to play one.

For me it is a difference of degrees...give a core only fighter with core only magic items Pounce...sure, no problem. Give it to a warforged fist of the forest monk with a Wounding battle fist and 7 natural attacks that hit for 20-40 damage each that bypasses every relevant damage reduction in the game? Thats game breaking. Same problem with the Uber power attacking barbarian. The one thing that limits them is their hitpoints. If they have the ability to basically obliterate any single monster they approach every time they get a turn, then hitpoints cease to be a limiting factor. Not to mention the value of the action economy.

The ability to pounce is in what, one or 2 maneuvers in the Tome of Battle? Maneuvers can only be used once, maybe twice in any given encounter, depending on how many actions you are willing to sacrifice to recharge them. And even then, only swordsages can take them, or someone with lots or initiator levels and PrC levels in martial classes. I would agree that martial adepts are still not as powerful as even core CODzilla. But they are certainly more powerful than core only fighters/monks/bards/rogues/paladins/rangers.

Not to mention it raises the bar for monsters big time...afterall if the PCs can do it so can the trolls and giants and grey renders that normally would only ever get 1 attack when they charged the wimpy wizard in the back ranks.

In regards to the OP. I think Monks generally are weak, Even with help from multiple splatbooks, they will generallly not be overpowered. But a munchkin player with an optimized 'Pounce build' will ruin your game. So to fix the potential problem, simply ban pounce. That is my advice.

 

[Dandu]

I've never played in a game that had 10 encounters in a day, or even more than 3 or 4. In my 17 years of gaming with about a half dozen different groups It has always been the spellcasters setting the pace of the game. They say "Im out of high level spells" and the party retreats to rest till spells come back.

I've seen as many instances of people retiring because the beatsticks ran out of blood.

And at mid to high levels, casters should have enough spells to cover 3-4 encounters, at least the way I play. Then again, I use battlefield control whereas a lot of other people blast, which tends to be resource intensive.

Give everybody pounce and unlimited high damage attacks every round and it's not 3.5e anymore. It's more like a Tome of Battle/4E.

This seems to be the crux of the issue: You want a low powered game. I reject your notion that having high powered characters somehow makes the game "not 3.5e", especially since core 3.5 has high powered options built into it.

Pounce may be too much for you, but it's not inherently unbalanced. It's a power boost, but not as huge as you seem to think it is. At any rate, it certainly doesn't cause problems by itself; a munchkin player with a pouncing build may cause issues, but those issues can probably be traced to the munchkin rather than Pounce.

I'd advise the OP to play with a group of decent human beings before banning Pounce.