Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gizzard" data-source="post: 1845631" data-attributes="member: 527">I played a PHB Monk from 1st-6th under 3.0E and was very very disappointed.  It's one of the great eternal debates on this board whether "Monks suck", and I've already partaken of that, so I wont rant here.  (Except for this; I can't help myself: One thing when looking at whether the "Monk sucks" is to decide whether you are talking about PHB Monks or Monks+Add-Ons.  Various splatbooks and 3rd party books make Monks not suck for instance.)Anyway: something new:Right now I am DMing a 3.5E game where a 12th level Monk and a 12th level Fighter hold the front line.  The 12 Monk in a dungeon crawl has some good points which make him fun, but he can't hold a candle to the 12 Fighter in terms of damage output.  As always, DR is the Monk's great nemesis.  Still, the fact that he can run around all over the place is great tactically, and the fact that we are dungeon crawling means that ground mobility matters as opposed to arial mobility.  The good saves are a distinct advantage at level 12 and the useful Skill set (Tumble!) can pay off.  Ultimately though, if the party had to choose either the Monk or the Fighter to champion them for the rest of the adventure, they'd chose the Fighter.  (That's better than from levels 1-6 where the party would choose the Bard over the Monk... ;-)  Calling them a "novelty class" is fair IMHO.</blockquote>