Monks Broken or Not

[StreamOfTheSky]

Letting monks use wis mod for hit/damage sounds ok if it scaled slowly. But I wouldnt recommend letting them use it for all strength related checks. Seems like a drastic overcompensation. Entirely taking out one of their standard ability scores.

Well...yes. One of the problems with monk is that it's Multiple Ability Dependent (MAD). So the idea would absolutely be to make a currently required ability score no longer important. Similar to how Pathfinder made Wisdom completely unimportant to a Paladin by making them Charisma-based spell casters with a good base will save.

If you were to replace str, it's important to replace it not just for to hit and damage, but for maneuvers, too. The game assumes monks can potentialy be or should be good at grappling, tripping, and/or disarming, at the least. If they still needed str for those, giving them wis to attack and damage wouldn't really be a complete fix. It also allows for the thematic example of an old, frail looking master monk that can smash through 18 wooden boards with his technique and Ki.

 

[HoboGod]

That sounds like a really good idea, actually. I try to house-rule that intuitive strike applies to both attack and damage if a player wants to play the old kung fu master.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

That sounds like a really good idea, actually. I try to house-rule that intuitive strike applies to both attack and damage if a player wants to play the old kung fu master.

Who's fine being limited to a single alignment option and a VERY strict roleplaying restriction -- LG and Exalted -- on top of the restrictions his class already faces for "balance reasons" or whatever. And spending a feat for the privelidge to mostly reduce his MAD to the level of any other warrior type.

 

[HoboGod]

Who's fine being limited to a single alignment option and a VERY strict roleplaying restriction -- LG and Exalted -- on top of the restrictions his class already faces for "balance reasons" or whatever. And spending a feat for the privelidge to mostly reduce his MAD to the level of any other warrior type.

Yeah, I mostly ignore the good requirement for exhalted feats, as do with most vile feats. Only if it's something where the feat is clearly associated to the alignment (such as vow of peace) do I strictly adhere to such restrictions.

However, I agree my solution didn't fairly solve many core complaints of monk, but it was a feat most monks seemed to be taking anyway and a quick fix to boot. I might try something like what you're suggesting for the next time somebody comes to me wanting to play an elderly kung fu badass. (That seems to happen a lot in my group, we've had two games where somebody has tried to recreate Master Splinter).

 

[Voadam]

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.

Pounce is for melee fighters essentially what core archer build fighters get for free. All full attacks without spending a round to close to a non-adjacent target.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Pounce is for melee fighters essentially what core archer build fighters get for free. All full attacks without spending a round to close to a non-adjacent target.

Yup, so long as Archers get no AoO ranged attacks, much higher weapon hardness and hp, Two-Handed power attack ratio, 2d6 base damage (as the greatsword), or less with combat maneuver bonus options or other special properties, ability to provoke and deliver AoOs with bowshots, automatic appropriate strength bonus damage (actually 1.5x since it's used two-handed) for your current strength without need for hundreds of gp in adjustments or a wait time to customize...

Then melee fighters with pounce would totally just be getting what archers get for free.

 

[HoboGod]

Oh, and don't forget the destructiveness of charging or diving from air with a natural attack. And the duel ability dependence that archers must suffer to hit and deal damage. Yeah, the list goes on.

 

[Voadam]

Yup, so long as Archers get no AoO ranged attacks, much higher weapon hardness and hp, Two-Handed power attack ratio, 2d6 base damage (as the greatsword), or less with combat maneuver bonus options or other special properties, ability to provoke and deliver AoOs with bowshots, automatic appropriate strength bonus damage (actually 1.5x since it's used two-handed) for your current strength without need for hundreds of gp in adjustments or a wait time to customize...

Then melee fighters with pounce would totally just be getting what archers get for free.

Eh.

Archers get their own things, starting with a full extra attack that stacks with haste from rapid shot (greater rapid shot), being able to full attack things outside of charging range, the option to stay out of melee and do full attacks, the ability to split their multiple attacks across the battlefield, etc.

At high levels spending hundreds of gp for a strength bow or anything else is trivial.

A bow is easier to sunder than a sword (5 hardness versus 10 and 5 hp versus 10 before the bonuses for enhancement). A sword is easier to rust than a bow.

At high level getting a bunch of +1 bane arrows is a viable fairly cheap strategy. Or arrows with an elemental enchantment different from the bow for stacking goodness with lower cost.

In our 17th level game the archer build fighter had always been the king of attacks and damage except under specific circumstances like DR good fiends that the smiting power attacking holy sword paladin would win at or specifically melee only attacks against low AC opponents which the power attacking righteous might with a two-handed weapon fighter 4/cleric 13 would win or grappling which the vow of poverty druid with two complete fighter prcs would win at when changed into a big bear. My eldritch knight wizard who used evocations as ranged attacks and the arcane trickster/archmage could not come close to the archer as consistent artillery (though when a sneak attack disintegrate penetrates SR, beats the fort save, and affects a crittable opponent and works it is beautiful).

More times than not our archer was our most effective combatant.

 

[Deset Gled]

Give everybody pounce and unlimited high damage attacks every round and it's not 3.5e anymore.

FWIW, Haste in 3.0 let all melee classes perform a move and full attack in one round. Of course, Haste was probably the most heavily debated spell in 3.0 because of this. I view the slow advent of pounce in 3.5 (first as a buff spell, then via other means) to be beautiful of WotC nerfing something, and then slowly power creeping it back in.

There's such a huge power discrepancy from core 3.5 to all-WotC-spatbook 3.5 that the two really can't be compared.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Archers get their own things, starting with a full extra attack that stacks with haste from rapid shot (greater rapid shot),

Well, for a feat they get Rapid Shot. And I don't know what greater RS is. Iproved RS removes the -2 to hit penalty, did you mean that?

being able to full attack things outside of charging range,

In practice that isn't often a major advantage IME.

the option to stay out of melee and do full attacks,

See above. Also, a good reach weapon + enlarged melee build with Improved Trip or Stand Still can also full attack and "stay out of melee."

the ability to split their multiple attacks across the battlefield, etc.

Would be awesome, if not for the whole problem of doing such low damage, they often don't have attacks left over once something does drop. I do have to say though, for my pouncing two-handed power attacking Bloodstorm Blade, who can mix melee attacks and thrown attacks together and treat the latter as melee for all purposes, the ability to always get his full attack even if he runs out of nearby foes is nice. But...only because he actually has the killing power to benefit from it.

At high levels spending hundreds of gp for a strength bow or anything else is trivial.

The cost is only one problem. A much bigger issue is how big a pain in the ass it is that it can't auto-adjust or at least have a larger "grace period" of below the str rating before it's unusable. Any time you're hit for str damage, anytime you have the gall to expect the full benefit of an enlarge person spell (I mean, you only suffered -2 to hit and -1 AC, not like you sacrificed much for the str bonus and worthless reach)... just...grr! These are very far from uncommon events.

A bow is easier to sunder than a sword (5 hardness versus 10 and 5 hp versus 10 before the bonuses for enhancement). A sword is easier to rust than a bow.

And a bow can be warped by warp wood and set on fire. Meh.

At high level getting a bunch of +1 bane arrows is a viable fairly cheap strategy. Or arrows with an elemental enchantment different from the bow for stacking goodness with lower cost.

It's ok. I'm a cheap bastard and am hesitant to event blow a low level potion, so I wouldn't use that option much, it's still over 100 gp per arrow. But at high levels it's decent to get some bane arrows.

More times than not our archer was our most effective combatant.

Good for him. How much damage is he doing a shot? How does he deal with DR? Wind Wall? How is your Eldritch Knight not doing more damage than him?