Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MeanGenes" data-source="post: 29152" data-attributes="member: 651">Hi Fisk,&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; The people on this board are acting flippant because this exact same thread came up only a few days ago by someone with the same question as you.&nbsp; And the fact of the matter is that these people are right.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; The problem is that (aside from the way you did combat), that things look powerful on paper, but are not so in practice.&nbsp; The monk on paper is written to be a unstoppable god.&nbsp; Spell resistance?&nbsp; Evasion? The best saves?&nbsp; 6 attacks/rd at high level?&nbsp; d20 unarmed damage?&nbsp; Where do I sign up?!&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; But in practice, the monk sucks.&nbsp; The monk lags behind the other melee classes in terms of average damage and in HP.&nbsp; While they are more capable versus magic wielding monsters, they are much worse versus physical damage-dealing monsters.&nbsp; In all the campaigns I've played in, the monk was always outshined by the fighters, clerics, mages, and rogues.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; On paper, 5 sneak attacks/round at high level sounds nasty...and it IS nasty.&nbsp; But a min/maxed fighter still shells out more damage over the long haul.&nbsp; The times when a rogue will actually pull off all 5 sneak attacks is very rare.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Rogues have a BAB that is only 3/4 that of the fighter, and will only end up hitting about 3/4 as often.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Sneak attacks are countered by 1) creatures immune to critical hits 2) characters wearing fortification armor 3) ANY concealment (darkness, invisibility, blur spell, etc.) 4) a similar level barb/rogue.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; And you have to play smart opponents intelligently.&nbsp; If a character has an 8 or higher intelligence, they should know better than to just stand there and eat sneak attacks.&nbsp; They will fight back to back with their friends, or will just take a 5 foot step to get out of flanking position, or they'll cast a spell which gives them concealment.&nbsp; And finally, any creature that is being sneak attacked will know it and they will concentrate their efforts on killing the rogue.&nbsp; Since rogues have less HP than fighters, they will not last nearly as long.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Play the opponents as they should be played and the rogue will find that he gets far less sneak attacks than if he is fighting a stupid animal that just sits there and claws/bites.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; I know the urge is to just make up a house rule for anything that sounds too powerful.&nbsp; But give the game a chance as it is first.&nbsp; They play-tested the 3rd edition rules for many months and if one class truly outshined another, then it would have been fixed by now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MeanGenes, post: 29152, member: 651"] Hi Fisk, The people on this board are acting flippant because this exact same thread came up only a few days ago by someone with the same question as you. And the fact of the matter is that these people are right. The problem is that (aside from the way you did combat), that things look powerful on paper, but are not so in practice. The monk on paper is written to be a unstoppable god. Spell resistance? Evasion? The best saves? 6 attacks/rd at high level? d20 unarmed damage? Where do I sign up?! But in practice, the monk sucks. The monk lags behind the other melee classes in terms of average damage and in HP. While they are more capable versus magic wielding monsters, they are much worse versus physical damage-dealing monsters. In all the campaigns I've played in, the monk was always outshined by the fighters, clerics, mages, and rogues. On paper, 5 sneak attacks/round at high level sounds nasty...and it IS nasty. But a min/maxed fighter still shells out more damage over the long haul. The times when a rogue will actually pull off all 5 sneak attacks is very rare. Rogues have a BAB that is only 3/4 that of the fighter, and will only end up hitting about 3/4 as often. Sneak attacks are countered by 1) creatures immune to critical hits 2) characters wearing fortification armor 3) ANY concealment (darkness, invisibility, blur spell, etc.) 4) a similar level barb/rogue. And you have to play smart opponents intelligently. If a character has an 8 or higher intelligence, they should know better than to just stand there and eat sneak attacks. They will fight back to back with their friends, or will just take a 5 foot step to get out of flanking position, or they'll cast a spell which gives them concealment. And finally, any creature that is being sneak attacked will know it and they will concentrate their efforts on killing the rogue. Since rogues have less HP than fighters, they will not last nearly as long. Play the opponents as they should be played and the rogue will find that he gets far less sneak attacks than if he is fighting a stupid animal that just sits there and claws/bites. I know the urge is to just make up a house rule for anything that sounds too powerful. But give the game a chance as it is first. They play-tested the 3rd edition rules for many months and if one class truly outshined another, then it would have been fixed by now. [/QUOTE]

Verification