What is the best way to create effective Monk only with core rules?

[Michael Tree]

The other posts have covered the basics of stats.

I should emphasize the importance of teamwork with other characters, especially wizards, sorcerers, clerics, and druids. One spare 1st level spell for a Mage Armor is far more useful in the long run than another magic missile, and Bull's Strength, Owl's Wisdom, and Greater Magic Fang are invaluable, especially at higher levels when such low level spells aren't missed yet give great bonuses.

For races I recommend either Humans, for the extra skill points and feat, or Elves, for the extra dexterity, low light vision, perception skill bonuses, and proficiency with bows. Only needing 4 hours of sleep per night, combined with the perception bonuses and a decent Wis bonus, also makes the monk a good night watchman.

Half-Orc monks can also be very useful, if you want to play a combat monk, with a bonus to Strength, no penalty to Wisdom, and darkvision.

 

[Gizzard]

> and proficiency with bows.

I know I am somewhat envious of our Bard who has taken the Precise Shot feat chain and can stand back and pick away at foes from relative safety. The Monk would be a naturally good archer, but it just didnt feel Monk-ly to me to do anything but run forward into combat and attempt to demonstrate the power of the "Striking Tiger" technique. ;-) A more prudent Monk might take up the bow idea though.

I'll second the idea about Mage Armor as well. If you have a Sorcerer, he has more of those than he knows what to do with and +4AC makes a big, big difference to a combat character.

 

[Thanee]

Yep, buffing spells are very potent in D&D and using them only for oneself is not a good option for the party wizard's (cleric's and so on).

A mage armoured, bull's strengthened, cat's graced, enduranced, owl's wisdom'ed, flying, hasted, greater magic fang'ed (unfortunately for the poor monks, druids are not that common), stone skinned, etc. Monk is so much more useful obviously!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Plane Sailing]

I must just say that the section in S&F where they say "we do the maths for you" is so bad it just isn't funny. It is utterly deplorable that they can think they can get away with getting probability so wrong.

(I'll post the actual maths later, since it is at home and I don't want to do all the leg work here again... but the thing to remember is that when calculating the flurry you CANNOT just add chances together - when there are two attacks you need to calculate the chance that both attacks hit, the chance that both attacks miss and the remainder is the chance that just one hits.

For a simplistic example, with a 1st level Monk and a 10 Str; if the flurry DC was 11 (50% chance for each blow to hit), the chance of both blows hitting is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25. The chance of both blows missing is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25. Thus, to find the probability of just either one of the blows landing it is "what is left".

i.e.
25% both hit (say 2d6 damage)
50% one hits (say 1d6 damage)
25% both miss.

Average damage expectation = .25x7 + .5x3.5 = 1.75 + 1.75 = 3.5

If that same monk just took one attack, his chance of hitting is 9 (60% for 1d6) and chance of missing 40%.

Average damage expectation = .6x3.5 = 2.1

If the AC was 16, so the Flurry needs 18 to hit

both hit on .15 x .15 = 0.0225
both miss on .85 x .85 = 0.7225
thus one hits on 1 - (0.7225 + 0.0225) = 0.255

Average damage = 0.0225 x 7 +0.255x3.5 = 0.1575 + 0.8925 = 1.05

While the single attack hits on 16+, 0r 25%, misses on 75%.

Average damage = 0.875
---------------------
The key thing to focus on here isn't the average damage (enlightening as it might be), but the chance of missing completely, which tends to be lower with the flurry (not to mention the chance of hitting twice). When attacking the wizards, the last thing you want to do is miss, so flurries are particularly good ideas.

S&F tries to add percentage probabilities when it should be multiplying them. A sadly common occurence

Cheers

 

[Plane Sailing]

Even with a 10 int, you're getting 5 skill points per level. That means you can keep Tumble, Spot or Listen, Move Silently, Hide in shadows, and Jump maxed out.

Spot isn't a class skill for monks...

However, I would certainly recommend a level of rogue if you are going to be scouting - partially because it makes your max spot (level+3) instead of half that, even when buying at double cost on your monk levels, but also because the sneak attack damage is great against stunned opponents once you get multiple attacks.

 

[Christian]

PlaneSailing-you're overthinking this one. For determining the probabilities of each combination, you do need to multiply the probabilities. But if all you're interested in is the average number of total hits per round, there's nothing wrong with treating each attack independently and then adding the average number of hits for each attack.

Example-suppose a character is taking two attacks, both hitting on a seventeen. That's a one in five chance of any given attack hitting. So, on a given round, there is one in twenty-five chance of both attacks hitting, an eight in twenty-five chance of exactly one attack hitting, and a sixteen in twenty-five chance of no attacks hitting. The average number of attacks that will hit in a round is (1*2 + 8)/25, or 0.40. Calculate it the 'quick & dirty' way, now: one in five for each attack is 0.2; 0.2 + 0.2 = 0.40. Try a few more-it always works! The proof is left as an exercise for the student.

There are other interesting numbers that can't be done this way-see, um, one of my posts above. For example, if you're sure that one more hit will bring the beastie down, you're not interesting in maximizing your average damage-you want to maximize your chance to hit with at least one blow. This is often done with a normal full attack rather than a flurry-but it's a lot harder to calculate.

The only problem with the 'we do the maths for you' in S&F is that the maths they do are too incomplete to give a good overview of flurrying vs. normal full attacks ...

 

[Shin Okada]

Thanks for a lot of suggestions!

Well, now I have two questions.

First. Many people emphasis the importance of Low-Light/Dark Vision for scouting. But for race selection, no-one suggest Dwarf. Having slow movement is that bad for a monk?

Second. For multi-classing, how do you think about Druid 1/Monk X? (I can start from 1st-level multiclass by using apprentice-level rules). That way I can buy and use druidic magic items such as Wand of Barkskin or Wand of Greater Magic Fang (in future). Is Sorcerer 1/Monk 1 better than this?

 

[Jens]

> I realize that the to-hit chance calculations are correct, but
> that to consider damage I really have to consider the criticals.

OK, so (quickly!) you do additional damage if you roll a 20 (5%) and then hit again. So multiply my original figures by 1.05 for regular hits, 1.10 for the flurry -- up until a natural 20 is required to hit. This change does have a slight effect; 19 is now very slightly better without the flurry as well. Here are the examples:

Need 18 to hit:
Regular = (105%) * (15% * 6.5) = 1.02 <- winner!
Flurry = (2 * 5%) * 6.5 = .65

You already have accounted for flurrying when you calculated the 6.5 expected damage, so both numbers should be multiplied by 105% only. Which means that it changes nothing qualitative.

I think your result (that Flurrying is at-least-as-good) holds for any number of attacks, btw. (is that true? seems odd to me).

Originally posted by Plans Sailing
...the thing to remember is that when calculating the flurry you CANNOT just add chances together

Well, if all you want is average damage, you *can* just add the chances since the damages are equal. I don't think the conclusion for whether Flurry or not is a better way to "hit at least once" if very different. My quick calculations say that Flurrying wins here except when you need a 17-19 to hit. This also seems to hold for any number of attacks.

 

[Macbrea]

I would probably go with:


Unglar, M Half-Orc Monk1 CR 1; Size:M Type Humanoid; HD (1d8); hp 8; Init +2 (+2 Dex, +0 Misc); Spd Walk 30'; AC 15 (flatfooted 13, touch 15), *Unarmed Strike +3 0'/B (1d6+3 20/x2 Primary T ) or *Flurry of Blows +1/+1 0'/B (1d6+3 20/x2 Primary T ) or ; SA: Orc Blood,Stunning Attack 1/day,Stunning Attack DC (13),Evasion,Flurry of Blows; Vision: Darkvision (60') AL: LN; Sv: Fort +2, Ref +4, Will +5; Str 16, Dex 14, Con 10, Int 13, Wis 16, Cha 6

Skills and Feats: Balance +6, Climb +5, Escape Artist +6, Jump +7, Listen +5, Tumble +6; Dodge,Exotic Weapon Proficiency,Improved Unarmed Strike,Martial Weapon Proficiency,Stunning Fist

Possessions: 0 Outfit (Monk's)

Take all stat advancements in your wisdom.

3rd = expertise
6th = Mobility
9th = springing attack
12th = whirlwind attack


That was made with the assumptions that your gamemaster would only allow you to ever use the players handbook.
If you are allowed to suddenly use the splatbooks you have a ton of other feats that were designed to make a monk actually useful.

Personally, the best monk concept I have seen was in one of our game. He was a improved grappler - choke hold monster.

 

[Plane Sailing]

PlaneSailing-you're overthinking this one. For determining the probabilities of each combination, you do need to multiply the probabilities. But if all you're interested in is the average number of total hits per round, there's nothing wrong with treating each attack independently and then adding the average number of hits for each attack.

While that might be true, it still obscures the issue of the reduced chance of missing with all attacks.

I think the proper maths for probability is so simple that there is no point in taking the chance of attempting a simplistic solution (which in the case of S&F has some things which are just plain wrong)

Example-<snip>
The average number of attacks that will hit in a round is (1*2 + 8)/25, or 0.40.
<snip>

????? I'm afraid I don't understand how you derived this bit? (not doubting you, just don't understand it). In the example you give (two attacks, both hitting on a 17) I'm sure that the chance of -at least one- hitting is 36%. (I wonder if we are talking at slightly cross purposes? In order to get the "average number of attacks", are you effectively adding in the attack "twice" in the circumstance where both hit? Although that would apparently count for the "missing 4%" between our two expectations, I don't think that is right... but I guess I'm probably talking about the "probability at this point", while you are talking about the "effective average over a long period of time" ??

Anyhow, as I mention at the end of my post, the issue *isn't* average damage - which is rarely important to know because of the significance of all the other variables - but how likely you are to get at least one hit in (which as you note at one point is sometimes the critical issue - if the target is on his last legs, with only a couple of hit points left, for instance). The chance of hitting with at least one attack in a multiple attack flurry is easy to calculate BTW, sicne it is merely the opposite of the chance of all attacks missing... just multiplying the figures together again.

e.g.
A Monk who normally gets +4/+1, and attacking an AC 17 Wizard (for instance), could take his normal full attack (chance of missing = 0.6 x 0.75 = 0.45, thus 55% of hitting at least once.) Or he could flurry for +2/+2/-1 (chance of missing = 0.7 x 0.7 x 0.85 = 0.4165, thus 58% chance of hitting at least once)

Apologies for the above to those with no interest in maths... move along, nothing to see here

I know that we are both on the same side here Flurry of Blows is an excellent ability, and especially since you can get full Str on both attacks if I were to create a Monk character I would make his Str (and then Con) his highest stats, without a doubt. I wouldn't bother with Wis for the AC bonus because although it is really handy and cool... I'd rather get the benefit elsewhere.

I'd love to play my next character as a monk. Heck I've got about half a dozen character concepts that I'd love to play!

I wonder how it would work out playing a LN druid-monk? From a RP angle he could be an interesting "one with nature" guy, from a metagaming angle it would be great to get that Magic Fang spell Shillelagh isn't too shabby either

Cheers