The Monk's Hit Dice Should Be a d8! [Rant]

[Hakkenshi]

I think Xarlen made the points that needed to be made.
To those who pointed out that Fly ends in a Featherfall, thank you, but see above, I admitted it had been 2nd Ed. (my mistake); however, I'm with Piratecat on the dispelling Fly issue: the spell is *gone*, not ended. And I don't care what the rules say in this case, I'd rule 0 it as a DM.

Zerovoid: Please show me this legendary weapon that does 1d20 damage per hit. And why is it that you would allow fighters to get huge enchantments on their swords that monks can't get on their fists???

Causing damage *is* important, but uh, if you can't hit the monk, how are you damaging him? With Spring Attack and high movement, most creatures have to double-move to reach the monk in the first place. And the monk doesn't need to Spring Attack a spellcaster, he grapples as Xarlen mentioned. Sure, the wizard can cast Let Go of Me if he likes

"Stunning Attack: The monk can use this ability once per round, but no more than once per level per day. The monk must declare she is using a stun attack before making the attack roll (thus, a missed attack roll ruins the attempt). A foe struck by the monk is forced to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + one-half the monk's level + Wisdom modifier). In addition to receiving normal damage, If the saving throw fails, the opponent is stunned for 1 round. The stunning attack is a supernatural ability."

Where does it say you can't use it with multiple attacks?

And nameless, while I agree with your Disarm comment, if everything flies, it gets boring quick--I know from experience. And your flying wizard (or whatever) can still be grappled by a jumping monk with a simple ring of Jump and/or Expeditious Retreat and/or Boots of S&S (which cost only 2,500 BTW).

Finally, let's not forget that the wizard has to get the spell off in the first place, and that even if he does, the monk's archer friend (or some surrogate character) can bring the offending spellcaster down if necessary.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

You misinterpreted my point. I wasn't trying to say that I think the monk is a powerful character class, quite the opposite, in fact. I was simply pointing out that, the goal of D&D generally being that all involved have fun, any DM can remedy the inherant weakness of a monk by giving said player a few special items.

Is this unbalanced? I doubt it, seeing how many people agree that the monk is inherantly weak to begin with. If I get a new player who's really psyched to play a monk, sure I'll give him a few extra items to make him decent in combat. It is just a game after all.

True.

I generally agree with this tact. I think some of the "problem monks" occured because a conscientious DM noticed how the low level monk utterly sucked. They start to beef up a bit at higher levels.

The monk makes an excellent 6th party member. Another spellcaster or any grunt makes a better 5th member. A second cleric would be my first choice.

 

[Storm Raven]

"Stunning Attack: The monk can use this ability once per round, but no more than once per level per day. The monk must declare she is using a stun attack before making the attack roll (thus, a missed attack roll ruins the attempt). A foe struck by the monk is forced to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + one-half the monk's level + Wisdom modifier). In addition to receiving normal damage, If the saving throw fails, the opponent is stunned for 1 round. The stunning attack is a supernatural ability."

Where does it say you can't use it with multiple attacks?

Here (from the SRD):

Use supernatural ability [Standard][AoO: No]

Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Stunning Attack is a supernatural ability. It follows the rules for supernatural abilities. You must use a standard action to use it. Making multiple attacks requires a full action, but since you used your standard action to use your Stunning Fist ability, you cannot make a full attack.

 

[Telor]

The group really dictates the beauty of the monk

My group has played since August '01.
Our initial group was a monk/psion; druid; cleric; sorcerer; rogue.
On the monk's second death, the player decided to quit the game. Not totally out of frustration, but obviously the 2nd death was the last straw.

Anyway, he did not focus on jumping, grappling, or any other sort of specialty moves. He frequently used stunning attack and flurry of blows. The player, for whatever reason, consistantly sucked at rolling so we found that flurry of blows was worse at the table than it is statistically.

He was our primary fighter. Without a high AC and without the augmentation of using +1 weapons (screw the DR... he could've used the +1 to hit and the +1 to damage) he hit back a lot less than he got hit. (If the 'monk' weapons weren't d6 I think they would be much better.)

When he and the rogue teamed up, they did wonders except for one problem... their massive movement gave them the ability to get too far away from the cleric (Cures and heals are touch spells people). Both of his deaths resulted because the cleric could not make it to him in time.

He didn't use his psion abilities often enough (thus making himself essentially half as high in levels as the rest of the group). This subject has nothing to do with the monk in and of itself.

Without a big burly bodyguard (ftr or brb) and without tactical foresight the monk does indeed suck.

All of this changes once he gets in the mid-high levels. He obviously achieves a different characer status.

And about Bards, I haven't encountered anyone who chose to play one in the few years I've played 3e.... that says more than enough to me.

-Telor

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Zerovoid: Please show me this legendary weapon that does 1d20 damage per hit. And why is it that you would allow fighters to get huge enchantments on their swords that monks can't get on their fists???

And how do you enchant monks fists?

You do realize that Magic Fang is the only way to do that in the core rules, don't you?

--Interested Spikey

 

[Xarlen]

You can't have enchanted gloves? They have Gloves of Dex, Gauntlets of Str, but there's no one in all existance who thought of Brass Knuckles +1? In Magic of Faerun, they have some Bracers that effect Unarmed attacks, allowing for enchantment purposes. Besides, like it's been pointed out, does it really mess you up that bad, that you can't get a +1 Sure Striking Kama, if you keep coming up against Damage Reduction critters?

You cannot disarm a bulette. But you can't sunder it, either. You can't dispel it. Or Turn it. So, what have we learned? Every class's abilities are not useful in every situation, against every adversary.

As for fighting a bulette, if I'm a fighter type, I want to GET AWAY. Bulettes, and other Big Ugly Damage Dealing nasties are very dangerous up front, but defenseless at range. Casting fly (Heh) or running away (The monk has this in spades) and bombarding the sucker is, IMHO, a better tactic then standing up there, and trying to power attack it to death, while sustaining all those painful attacks.

Sure, Dispel may not reach everything if it's 50' feet away, but neither can that wizard fireball, lightning bolt, or other area effects. That's why there's a Targeted dispel. Even moreso, if Flight is such a powerful thing in your campaign, then why aren't there more villians with wizard allies ready to counterspell a flight? Has Fly suddenly become the next Haste?

No, you can't compare the fighter to the monk in some situations, but neither can you do it the other way. When facing a big ugly monster, the Fighter is what you need. But what about creatures with spell like abilities? Saves that range from Fort to Ref to Will? Sure, the fighter MAY withstand a poison or drain attack, but that Domination, or Breath weapon could be the death of him. What about Incorperal creatures? Ranged Touch attacks?

A fighter can beat things up, and is resistant to physical stuff. A monk can walk through a dungeon with Draining creatures, Traps, and Spellcasters, likely is he to survive, compared to a fighter. Even moreso, that Fighter can't heal himself when he REALLY needs it.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I just want to pop in to point out that, as someone else already said, it's damn fun to say HI-YAH!

Monks have style. Monks are cool. They may not be the most powerful characters ever, but they're cool.

Especially if you have access to some of the optional stuff in OA.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

And how do you enchant monks fists?

You do realize that Magic Fang is the only way to do that in the core rules, don't you?

--Interested Spikey

Enchanting items, even items not on the initial list is in the dmg, and is assumed to be something players can do. Inventing new uber weapons isn't, though I suppose someone oculd invent an increase damage die enchantment. But an amulet that constantly manifest a certain spell is a much, much easier concept to deal with.

 

[Hakkenshi]

Sorry, but a monk's stunning attack is a virtual feat, and as such, since it follows the rules of the feat itself, is not subject to the supernatural ability rule.

Stunning Fist [General]
Prerequisites: Dex 13+, Improved Unarmed Strike, Wis 13+, base attack bonus +8 or higher.

Benefit: Declare that the character is using the feat before making an attack roll (thus, a missed attack roll ruins the attempt). It forces a foe damaged by the character's unarmed attack to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + one-half the character's level + Wis modifier), in addition to dealing damage normally. If the defender fails his saving throw, he is stunned for 1 round (until just before the character's next action). A stunned character can’t act and loses any Dexterity bonus to Armor Class. Attackers get a +2 bonus on attack rolls against a stunned opponent. The character may attempt a stunning attack once per day for every four levels attained, and no more than once per round.

The emphasis is added by me, but this really proves my point.

Zerovoid: On the issue of enchanting fists, I believe a couple of posters above have answered quite well. And if that's not enough, look at the items in Sword and Fist, there's plenty there to help the monk whup some behind.
No class has the same inherent damage potential past level 12 or so. And AC? Whenever we had a monk in the party, he had the best AC at low-levels, and at high levels, he had the speed and mobility to avoid getting hit.

Are people allowing their characters to start with full plate at level 1??? It usually takes us a while to get that high.

 

[Storm Raven]

Sorry, but a monk's stunning attack is a virtual feat, and as such, since it follows the rules of the feat itself, is not subject to the supernatural ability rule.

No, it has to follow the rules for supernatural abilities, since the text of the PHB explicitly states that it is a supernatural ability. Even if a feat grants you a supernatural ability, use of that ability still has to follow the rules for supernatural abilities.

And the part you highlighted doesn't prove your point. It actually works against you, since it limits the use of stunning fist to no more than once per round, just like the rules for the use of supernatual abilities do. In other words, the explicit text of the feat backs up the supernatual ability limitations. The text does not back up the position that it is able to circumvent those limitations.

Perhaps if you could show some quote to back up your "it is a feat so it doesn't have to follow the supernatural ability rules", you might have a point. Otherwise you are just making crap up.