Try it in your game? Remove caster level.

[Tovec]

How many D&D wizards would be taking on a Balor at character level 12 in the first place, seeing as it is a CR 20 monster?

You're supposed to fight Balors and win when you're around level 20. This is how the game should be. If you want your Balors to be a super evil bad guy that challenges the players, throw him at the party when they're significantly below level 20. Although that will probably result in a Blasphemy related TPK.

My point about the 12th level wizard was that he could actually take down a balor (a CR20) solo. No other class can conceivably do that, and while the wizard would almost certainly die before completing the task no other class would have the shadow of a chance, only the wizard. In that regard the wizard is either slightly or majorly broken.

Monks have many mechanical problems. This is a mathamatical fact. That doesn't mean that they can't be powerful relative to other characters; for example, the party could consist of Samurais, Truenamers, and Healers, or just be very badly run.

Mechanical problems (the short version):

• Multiple Attribute Dependency: You need Str for damage, Dex for Ref and AC, Con for Fort and HP, Wis for AC, Will, and monk abilities. That leaves Cha and Int as dump stats... but you probably want something in Int to take advantage of your monk skills...
• 3/4th BAB: While this is not a deal breaker - Clerics, Druids, and Psychic Warriors all have the same BAB - the monk has no way of buffing up to high heaven like the aforementioned classes.
• D8 hit dice: This is more a problem for the monk than the Cleric or Druid, both of whom can have high AC and HP.
• Lack of Reach: Reach is your friend.
• Lack of Synergistic Class Abilities

Hey, as long as I'm throwing down gauntlets, feel free to build a monk and we can have a duel - monks are, after all, "caster killers", right?

I'm for a level 13 , personally.

What I am asking is slightly off-topic, but I would love to see your ideas for fixing these bullet points.

What is on topic is how I don't agree that monks are balanced, middle of the road or a prime example of how classes should be made. I do agree casters are REALLY strong currently and I'm interested in hearing out any ideas which changes this. I don't think the idea proposed in this thread addresses that concern however.

 

[Visigani]

That pretty much says it all.



That is not a vital role. It is a non-role. It is the role I described above. The guy who gets targeted last b/c he's hard to hit but he's not a threat. It's the role of watching someone outshine you in everything you try to do.

I suggest you play one before you conclude they are "balanced."

*sigh*

Does a cleric contribute when he heals party members? I mean he's not directly dealing damage, but I'd be loathe to suggest he wasn't contributing.

Is the rogue contributing when he's aiding another, or handing you a potion, or engaged in any other number of activities.

In combat a monk could easily be a johnny-everywhere. Did the wizard just go down? Does the rogue need help setting up a flank?


Consider the notion of a character that has the same combat prowess as a fighter, the same arcane spellcasting as a wizard, the same divine casting as a cleric, and the same skill aptitude as the rogue.

Would seem a bit overpowered wouldn't it?

Yet the monk dips his hand into all of these things in his own way yet still people are demanding to know why he can't fight as well as the fighter.

 

[Dandu]

My point about the 12th level wizard was that he could actually take down a balor (a CR20) solo. No other class can conceivably do that, and while the wizard would almost certainly die before completing the task no other class would have the shadow of a chance, only the wizard. In that regard the wizard is either slightly or majorly broken.

Ok, I rather dispute that a level 12 wizard could do it, but if so, other classes that would probably be able to do it as well are: Sorcerer, Psion, Wilder, Cleric, Archivist, Druid, Artificer. Off the top of my head.

But again, I doubt it. If you've got a winning tactic for this sort of thing, though, let me know.

What I am asking is slightly off-topic, but I would love to see your ideas for fixing these bullet points.

I've always considered the Unarmed Swordsage to work well.

What is on topic is how I don't agree that monks are balanced, middle of the road or a prime example of how classes should be made. I do agree casters are REALLY strong currently and I'm interested in hearing out any ideas which changes this. I don't think the idea proposed in this thread addresses that concern however.

I personally am a fan of sitting the players down and telling them not to mess around with the system too much. This eliminates the most broken spells then and there. Granted, this only works with people you trust and are friends with. I realize that not everyone you game with will be like that. In those cases, you could just review and ban spells on a case by case basis, or have people play Warmages/Dread Necromancers/Beguilers.

Using better classes such as Psychic Warrior, ToB classes, the Totemist, and etc, which can perform very well in their specialties, helps bring up melee characters to an appropriate level, I feel.

I don't think there's ultimately an easy fix for the problem. I've looked for one and what I ended up doing was helping create a new system...

... which, incidentally, is releasing today via Child's Play. You should take a look.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

*sigh*

Yet the monk dips his hand into all of these things in his own way yet still people are demanding to know why he can't fight as well as the fighter.

Honestly, the "non-consumption of resources" isn't a role.

And as for fighting as well as a fighter...well, I'm among the very few (around here, at least) who doesn't HR monks to full BAB. I don't think it's necessary.

But I'll also readily admit that the Monk- one of my favorite classes- is not written in a way to make it on a par with other classes in terms of raw power. Cool factor they have in spades, but "oomph?" Not so much.

 

[Dandu]

And as for fighting as well as a fighter...well, I'm among the very few (around here, at least) who doesn't HR monks to full BAB. I don't think it's necessary.

Well, it depends on what the other houserules are. 3/4ths BAB classes like the Rogue, Cleric, Druid, and others I'm forgetting can do fine in combat provided that have a way of making up for their lower BAB. If you give them the ability to make touch attacks, for example, via expending Stunning Fist attempts or something, it's less necessary.

But I'll also readily admit that the Monk- one of my favorite classes- is not written in a way to make it on a par with other classes in terms of raw power. Cool factor they have in spades, but "oomph?" Not so much.

Thoughts on the Legend monk, Danny? I believe you've seen it before.

 

[xigbar]

I've never really needed more proof to the monk's relative lack of power than the Unarmed Swordsage. Swordsage is generally considered to be a low Tier 3, barely out of Tier 4. I would say that makes it "balanced" in comparison to other classes; Since OP doesn't want them compared, why not? But, to be fair, let's compare them to the "game world." In a low-magic setting, ground mobility will actually be useful, because you don't have casters flying around out of your reach. Things with wings can be hit with your archer. But, this setting doesn't really have merit, because the reason the monk is considered weak in the first place is because casters were in fact written the way they were. If they aren't in your game world, the problem is meaningless. Any magic setting beyond that will allow for the relatively low level spell slot that flight fills, which is the first thing that casters can use to invalidate monks. Monks won't yet afford an item granting them permanent flight, and when they can, the Wizard (or any Tier 1, for that matter) has moved on. Even on ground, an Abrupt Jaunting Wizard escapes the monks hand's entirely without it spending feats to gain reach. Just because you don't like that the class purported to be a mystical martial genius doesn't own things too busy rewriting the laws of existence on their own quasi-plane to notice you doesn't mean anything better than something that doesn't do what it's fluff would imply it does is balanced, and everything else is overpowered. Yes, Tier 1s (or other full casters, in general) are powerful, but a comparison to Swordsage, usually considered at the middle of the road in power, will suffice. It gets your HD, your BAB, your WIS bonuses, a good deal of your other class features too. It doesn't get your FORT save, but gets an extra couple of skill points over you, and gets a full maneuvers progression. With maneuvers out of the equation, you could make the case the two classes are roughly matched, but, alas, it DOES in fact have those maneuvers. As for the monk not being gear dependent, check the costs of an Amulet of Mighty Fists, something required of a monk to keep it's strikes in competition with other weapons. A caster, by the way, doesn't need any gear, spells books aside.

 

[Dandu]

Paragraphs are your friend.

 

[xigbar]

Paragraphs are your friend.

tl;dr

 

[Tovec]

Ok, I rather dispute that a level 12 wizard could do it, but if so, other classes that would probably be able to do it as well are: Sorcerer, Psion, Wilder, Cleric, Archivist, Druid, Artificer. Off the top of my head.

I said COULD and meant it. Yes I agree nearly all casters could do it equally well. That is my issue with casters, wizard just happens to be readily recognizable in a "caster" role.

I've always considered the Unarmed Swordsage to work well.

Where is this from?

I personally am a fan of sitting the players down and telling them not to mess around with the system too much. This eliminates the most broken spells then and there. Granted, this only works with people you trust and are friends with. I realize that not everyone you game with will be like that. In those cases, you could just review and ban spells on a case by case basis, or have people play Warmages/Dread Necromancers/Beguilers.

Certainly, but I've had several players where this simply doesn't work. They are reasons I dislike several classes, builds, races, etc. I have had to ban them accordingly after testing them out. Now when I see something potentially as dangerous and annoying I kill it, ban it or stop it from coming in ASAP.

Using better classes such as Psychic Warrior, ToB classes, the Totemist, and etc, which can perform very well in their specialties, helps bring up melee characters to an appropriate level, I feel.

I hate TOB for several reasons. As far as picking an exotic version of a base class I don't enjoy this tactic either and 90% of the time the player is choosing it solely for the power and not the flavour.

 

[Dandu]

I said COULD and meant it. Yes I agree nearly all casters could do it equally well. That is my issue with casters, wizard just happens to be readily recognizable in a "caster" role.

I would still be interested in hearing how a level 12 spellcaster can solo a Balor.

Where is this from?

The adaptations section in Tome of Battle for the Swordsage class.

I hate TOB for several reasons. As far as picking an exotic version of a base class I don't enjoy this tactic either and 90% of the time the player is choosing it solely for the power and not the flavour.

Then I am out of ideas for you.