Quasqueton
First Post
Setting is a "standard" D&D campaign. The party already has a fighter, cleric, and wizard. Which would be the better 4th member of the team: a rogue or a monk?
Quasqueton
Quasqueton
Rogue or Monk?
- Thread starter Quasqueton
- Start date
reiella
Explorer
An iconic party such as you described is very useful in that each character can be specialized in their goal/purpose.
A rogue, oddly enough, is the only who can disarm magical traps, and serves a semi-vital roll. A monk can simulate the roll through trap avoidance or absorption however.
[ Add ]
But honestly, whatever the player would have the most fun playing.
A rogue, oddly enough, is the only who can disarm magical traps, and serves a semi-vital roll. A monk can simulate the roll through trap avoidance or absorption however.
[ Add ]
But honestly, whatever the player would have the most fun playing.
Last edited:
Bendris Noulg
First Post
A common recurring discussion with 2 out of 3 new members to our group over the years:Crothian said:
Newbie: What's the party need?
Me: Another member would be nice.
Newbie: Yeah, but what do they need?
Me: [Deliver 3 seconds of cold stare] Another member would be nice.
(If the guy's bright, it usually ends there. Some haven't been that bright, though... A few have been quite dense, in fact.)
Lu Wei Fong
First Post
Well, I'm one of the only two (so far) who voted for monk. However, it is a biased vote, seeing as they are my favorite class, and I would even vote for a monk as the best addition to a group of three monks 
That said, I would have to agree with these other fine fellows, that the player should pick the class he or she will have the most fun with. It is a game after all, and the object is to have lots o' fun
That said, I would have to agree with these other fine fellows, that the player should pick the class he or she will have the most fun with. It is a game after all, and the object is to have lots o' fun
Herpes Cineplex
First Post
In the absence of a "Whatever character the player thinks would be the most fun" option, I was forced to select the one I think is the most fun: the Rogue. (I am, incidentally, an expert in fun: so if your ability to make a decision is permanently impaired for some reason, you may take my advice and be assured that it will serve you well. )
Of course, I like monks just fine; they're an interesting utility-fighter, and you can do quite a bit with them. The 3.5 version looks better than the 3.0 version, thanks to changes in how damage resistance was handled, but even the 3.0 monk was a fun little class. We've got a monk in our Scarred Lands game, and of all the characters in the party, he's the most interesting one to interact with. When a monk is played well, they can be very memorable.
But for my money, Rogue's the only way to go. They're just such flexible little monkeys, able to do scouting, trap disarming, negotiations, infiltrations, fill a second-string combat position, use all kinds of magic items, and so on, that I was never at a loss when trying to imagine what my character would want out of a situation, and I never felt bored or useless.
--
so unless you suddenly notice you're not me, it looks like rogue is the answer
ryan
)Of course, I like monks just fine; they're an interesting utility-fighter, and you can do quite a bit with them. The 3.5 version looks better than the 3.0 version, thanks to changes in how damage resistance was handled, but even the 3.0 monk was a fun little class. We've got a monk in our Scarred Lands game, and of all the characters in the party, he's the most interesting one to interact with. When a monk is played well, they can be very memorable.
But for my money, Rogue's the only way to go. They're just such flexible little monkeys, able to do scouting, trap disarming, negotiations, infiltrations, fill a second-string combat position, use all kinds of magic items, and so on, that I was never at a loss when trying to imagine what my character would want out of a situation, and I never felt bored or useless.
--
so unless you suddenly notice you're not me, it looks like rogue is the answer
ryan
Tulon
First Post
Well, I voted for the Rogue. Not only because the Rogue is able to deliver some nice support via archery-backup or trap setting/disarming or his other abilities, but mostly because ... well it's a rogue!
This class fits almost in any group, and strenghtens it not only in the aspect of efficiency, but mainly the general fun-factor. I think a rogue is a must to almost any standard group, as well as the fighter/paladin or the mage. Those three classes are "the core", in my opinion.
There's nothing better than a classical discussion between the idealistic male human warrior and the airily female half-elven rogue about how to solve a problem "the right way".
Yes, I know, I do like cliche...
This class fits almost in any group, and strenghtens it not only in the aspect of efficiency, but mainly the general fun-factor. I think a rogue is a must to almost any standard group, as well as the fighter/paladin or the mage. Those three classes are "the core", in my opinion.
There's nothing better than a classical discussion between the idealistic male human warrior and the airily female half-elven rogue about how to solve a problem "the right way".
Yes, I know, I do like cliche...
Last edited:
Thanee
First Post
Is that an actual question?
The monk does not really add anything to the party, which isn't well covered otherwise. The rogue's trapfinding ability alone, however, can prove highly useful. Also the rogue has better skills than the monk, something the three others absolutely don't have. Together with the fighter and potentially the cleric, the rogue is a nice secondary fighter and the rogue is a good scout. Both, the monk can also do, but he's not that much better at it to justify neglecting the rest. Basically the only thing the monk is better at, is making saving throws (so he could probably work as a sort of "trapfinder" as well).
Bye
Thanee
The monk does not really add anything to the party, which isn't well covered otherwise. The rogue's trapfinding ability alone, however, can prove highly useful. Also the rogue has better skills than the monk, something the three others absolutely don't have. Together with the fighter and potentially the cleric, the rogue is a nice secondary fighter and the rogue is a good scout. Both, the monk can also do, but he's not that much better at it to justify neglecting the rest. Basically the only thing the monk is better at, is making saving throws (so he could probably work as a sort of "trapfinder" as well
).Bye
Thanee
You have to go Rogue.
