Unarmed Strike Signature Weapon

[Dandu]

Nice to see how VoP stacks up on a dragon, but how does it compare to a similarly leveled character without VoP?

Take a look. Be sure to check the box under "Skills" to see the spells.

Defenses: lower AC, but 50% miss chance from Greater Blink and 1d4+4 mirror images from the Greater Mirror Image spell (5 minimum). Also, Wings of Cover.

Saves: Fort +12/Ref +12/Will +16, before Ruin Delver's Fortune is used.

HP: 73 (about as much as the monk, lol), but with self healing and the ability to generate temporary HP via Ruin Delver's Fortune.

Offense: Battlefield Control, save vs status effect, direct damage, and save or die spells present.

Martial efficacy: it's a spellcaster, it doesn't have one. I don't have a lot of melee builds just lying around, you know.

Ability to defend against dragon: Probably higher than that of the monk.

 

[HoboGod]

I was just posting quick and dirty optimization, showing the level and degree at which things can stack. From there, the character build can go any number of ways for any number of tactics. Things may be tweaked here and there, ability scores reallocated, the AC I listed could be obtained from a single level dip into monk with VoP, which tends to be enough for some builds. It included no feat selection but the assumed ones for VoP and neglected any spells but Mage Armor. I wasn't trying to insinuate that a VoP Monk can surpass dragons, merely trying to illustrate a comparison. For that misunderstanding, I apologize.

Yes, magic tends to provide many utilities that give the edge to a well-prepared spell caster. In a way, that's what I like about DnD, the wizard needs the fighter to provide a reasonable distraction and the fighter needs the wizard to blow things up. If left to adventure alone, the wizard would likely get killed by a golem or eaten by tigers while the fighter would get tricked by fairies into falling off a cliff. I don't care how apt the wizard thinks she is, she dies without someone marching ahead of her. As does the fighter who has no one to watch her back. So for that reason, I'm saying VoP Monk is broken, because it can help create an untouchable defender with limited weak points to protect the wizard.

EDIT: It should be noted that I'm accepting the game mechanic which I've originally posted upon. Thank you for the input. If a player can find a reasonable and creative way to incorporate the humility of VoP with the batman-level dedication and stubbornness of Kensai, I'll let them mix the two.

 

[Persiflage]

Only time I've seen VoP result in genuine cheese was when combined with a Warforged Cleric with the Saint template... and even then, the VoP aspect was more about contributing to the character's overall unkillableosity[1] than upping their effectiveness on the battlefield. Besides, any build that includes "Cleric" is pretty much automatic win: adding VoP on top of that is just a light sprinkling of Parmesan on top of 10lbs of industrial-strength Stilton.

Have to agree with Dandu and StreamOfTheSky: Monk is a poor choice for VoP (and practically everything else, but never mind) and VoP itself is sub-par in most cases.



[1] You might reasonably object to this word on the grounds that it isn't one.

 

[Dandu]

So for that reason, I'm saying VoP Monk is broken, because it can help create an untouchable defender with limited weak points to protect the wizard.

But the monk doesn't defend, she just stands there. In World of Warcraft, tanks can draw aggro by forcing monsters to attack then. The monk has no ability to do this and as a consequence, there's nothing she can do to stop an enemy from walking past her and smacking the person behind her that she was ostentiably protecting.

She may be untouchable, but she's also a waste of space because she has no impact on the battlefield beyond occupying a 5ft square and providing flanking bonuses. And she's not even that good at occupying her square because she lacks the strength to withstand a good bull rush.

If you think I'm wrong, just answer one question: An attacker pops up. What does the monk do to stop him from reaching the wizard? Why would this attacker choose to attack the monk? If he chooses to attack the monk, and finds that he can't hit her, but she does not deal him any damage in return, why would he continue attacking her instead of trying to take out the wizard casting powerful spells behind her?


Also, re: broken defenses: Magic Missile. Hell, Empowered Vile Fell Drain Magic Missile.

 

[Persiflage]

Time for a T-shirt slogan:

"Monks don't kill people: Wizards, Druids, Clerics, Warblades, Swordsages, Rogues and cheesed-out Barbarians kill people."

Of course, I may have to work on the pithiness a bit.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Time for a T-shirt slogan:

"Monks don't kill people: Wizards, Druids, Clerics, Warblades, Swordsages, Rogues and cheesed-out Barbarians kill people."

Of course, I may have to work on the pithiness a bit.

"Monks don't kill people: Everyone Else Does."

 

[Persiflage]

"Monks don't kill people: Everyone Else Does."

It's an improvement, but I give it ten minutes before somebody walks up to me and says "Swashbucklers".

 

[HoboGod]

If you think I'm wrong, just answer one question: An attacker pops up. What does the monk do to stop him from reaching the wizard? Why would this attacker choose to attack the monk? If he chooses to attack the monk, and finds that he can't hit her, but she does not deal him any damage in return, why would he continue attacking her instead of trying to take out the wizard casting powerful spells behind her?

The monk stops the attacker by being the first person in line. Unless the DM controls only monsters that have pre-obtained knowledge of which player is most dangerous, they should attack what looks like the easiest prey. The unarmored creep carelessly walking ahead should be the first to get ambushed. The monster shouldn't know who to attack until the wizard pops off her first spell, at which point the battle might be half over. Yes, there's not much then that the monk can do to hold the monster there (though there are martial strikes like Stone Vise that the monk could use if she takes any class levels from Bo9S), but moving out of combat with the monk means getting more damage from AoO (albeit not as great as the wizard's damage, but becomes critically significant when low on hit points) and not being able to full attack. And depending what that first spell might be, it becomes more futile to attack the wizard than the monk.

And occupying a 5 ft square is more advantageous than you make it sound. The position of pawns on the board has more significance than the position of queens. A well-placed monk stops a monster from charging the wizard or flanking the cleric. I think the problem is that you and I have different opinions on the value of defense.

Also, re: broken defenses: Magic Missile. Hell, Empowered Vile Fell Drain Magic Missile.

Anything that normally would have the spells to cast would be a fool to target the monk and serve to aid the beatstick's purpose. In my opinion, an encounter with something like a dire ape is more problematic to a party beatstick because the creature is beefy enough and vicious enough to waste the beatstick and have enough strength left to mutilate the rest of the party. When the beatstick becomes too beefy, herself, this encounter becomes a joke and certain utility magic becomes unnecessary.

 

[Dandu]

The monk stops the attacker by being the first person in line.

When fighting in a tunnel, sure he does. Unless the attacker uses Bull Rushing, at any rate.

Unless the DM controls only monsters that have pre-obtained knowledge of which player is most dangerous

Monsters that would be in no way able to use their brains to determine who the most dangerous party members were, which ones were the weak casters, or make any sort of tactical assessment other than a blind charge at the first person they see. Seriously, I'm sure anything with an Int of about 8 or greater will notice that people who can rewrite reality on a whim are pretty high up there on the danger meter.

they should attack what looks like the easiest prey.

Which would not be the squishy wizard?

The unarmored creep carelessly walking ahead should be the first to get ambushed.

d4 hit dice, no muscles, sissy clothing at the back vs someone who obviously has mucles, ie, a strength score of 14. Who is going to get ambushed again?

The monster shouldn't know who to attack until the wizard pops off her first spell, at which point the battle might be half over.

Unless they are mentally incapable of noticing that someone's wearing either a mage's robes. or a bondage outfit if you're Hennet, and concluding that that person may be a caster of some sort.

but moving out of combat with the monk means getting more damage from AoO (albeit not as great as the wizard's damage, but becomes critically significant when low on hit points)

Yes, a whopping 2d6+2 damage with an attack bonus of +11 for the AoO. Truely an intimidating penalty for a melee opponent that will likely have HP in the triple digits.

And depending what that first spell might be, it becomes more futile to attack the wizard than the monk.

Ah, but that's doubleplus wrongbad metagame knowledge there! Arent monsters supposed to avoid that?

And occupying a 5 ft square is more advantageous than you make it sound.

Not when that's all you do, it isn't.

The position of pawns on the board has more significance than the position of queens. A well-placed monk stops a monster from charging the wizard or flanking the cleric.

That's not broken, that's lackluster at best.

I think the problem is that you and I have different opinions on the value of defense.

I think the problem is that the monk's defensive capabilities suck.

 

[HoboGod]

Ah, I see a better picture, now. Our opinions are so radically different because our sense of battle in DnD is so different. In the games you play, the average monster is aware and can distinguish the subtle differences between humanoids. In all the games I play, the average monster is oblivious and can as easily distinguish the subtle differences between humanoids as humanoids can distinguish the subtle differences between insects.

Only when humanoids and exceptional monsters attack the party do they have the knowledge of which you speak.

Also, it's very rare that my group fights on an open plain where walls and obstacles don't exist that hinder the movement of players and monsters in some manner, and when monsters tend to range in greater sizes, they tend to have greater hindrances.