Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8050408" data-attributes="member: 6704184">So does everyone else using Hex or Hunter's Mark. The monk, unlike most other guys, can on the next round throw out 4 attacks, conservatively at 2d6+3, and take down one of those weaker enemies your combats are apperently full of by themselves. I do have such enemies, but they're still very dangerous and they are support for 1-3 bigger, tougher, enemies.&nbsp;LOL wow. So, Hex and Hunter's Mark is basically at-will, but you play down it's utility on the monk. Okay. And no, it's not basically at-will. The claim is completely bonkers-level absurd. Every class has other stuff to use spell slots for, in and out of combat, and you never get a &quot;basically at-will&quot; number of first level slots. I really think that you guys are playing a completely different game than those of us who are pushing back here. I haven't figured out entirely what the difference is, but a big part of it has to be combat design, use of terrain as both challenge and opportunity, etc, but...I don't think that's it.&nbsp;oof man. So, the Monk &quot;sucks&quot; if you assume a CharOp heavy game where things always go the way they're assumed to go in a white room analysis. Nope.I've run games for optimised characters and for characters built like people, and...no. In either case, I'd consider such a fight a failure on my part, unless it wasn't really there to challenge the PCs significantly.And that rogue will get attacked in the first round, unless they fail to hit and the enemies don't know they are a threat. And even then, if the enemies have a lurker, then the lightly armored guy hanging back with a bow is a juicy target.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8050408, member: 6704184"] So does everyone else using Hex or Hunter's Mark. The monk, unlike most other guys, can on the next round throw out 4 attacks, conservatively at 2d6+3, and take down one of those weaker enemies your combats are apperently full of by themselves. I do have such enemies, but they're still very dangerous and they are support for 1-3 bigger, tougher, enemies. LOL wow. So, Hex and Hunter's Mark is basically at-will, but you play down it's utility on the monk. Okay. And no, it's not basically at-will. The claim is completely bonkers-level absurd. Every class has other stuff to use spell slots for, in and out of combat, and you never get a "basically at-will" number of first level slots. I really think that you guys are playing a completely different game than those of us who are pushing back here. I haven't figured out entirely what the difference is, but a big part of it has to be combat design, use of terrain as both challenge and opportunity, etc, but...I don't think that's it. oof man. So, the Monk "sucks" if you assume a CharOp heavy game where things always go the way they're assumed to go in a white room analysis. Nope. I've run games for optimised characters and for characters built like people, and...no. In either case, I'd consider such a fight a failure on my part, unless it wasn't really there to challenge the PCs significantly. And that rogue [I]will[/I] get attacked in the first round, unless they fail to hit and the enemies don't know they are a threat. And even then, if the enemies have a lurker, then the lightly armored guy hanging back with a bow is a juicy target. [/QUOTE]

Verification