Monks get some very big dice at high levels and they get a lot of swings. Honestly, monks are much less dependent on Str to do damage than most classes.
Without a good strength score, you'll end up doing maybe 1d20+5 damage a hit, which isn't that good at level 20. Compared to a fighter's possible 3d6+16, your damage sucks.
I also don't see where the complaint about hit points comes from. D8 statistically is not much worse than the d10 that the fighters use. If you have a high CON then the exact die roll matters even less.
This is where stat dependancy comes in. After giving your highest stats to Wis and Dex (and possibly Str), your Con will most likely be average, if that. Whereas a fighter can afford to pump Con, you can't. That means your hit points suffer more than the d8 reflects.
I do admit that monks are probably the most stat dependent class in the PHB.
This, IMHO, is what absolutely kills the monk. Their stat dependancy makes them neutered unless you are playing in a campaign that allows high stats (like 5d6 drop two, or 40 point point buy, etc.).
First, the monk has WAY too few skill points. 6+Int would be better. The monk is the second most skill-dependent class after the rogue and it's 4+int skill points is too low for them to have many of the skills they need at levels that they need them.
I really don't think this is a problem. There are several other classes that deserve 6 skill points a level more than a monk.
Second, the monk's Ki Strike (or whatever it is called) that allows them to strike creatures that need magic weapons is too feeble. It is too low and comes in too late. By the time a monk can breach +1 every warrior-type in the party probably has +2 weapons. If I remember correctly, the monk doesn't even get the hit or damage bonuses from it. This can however be remedied with monk-weapons (which are all pretty bad and hard to find to boot). I also allow monks to enchant brass knuckles so that they do their barehanded damage WITH the enhancements from the knuckles (i.e. the knuckles do not have a damage die, you use the die from your fist.)
Agreed, Ki Strike blows. And the magical weapon equivelant for a monk costs THREE TIMES as much as a magical weapon.
[qupte]Third, the monk's SR is lame. I wouldn't object to the fact that you get it so late if it weren't for the fact that the SR is so low. By the time you get it it is too weak to do much for you and there is no way to boost it through abilities or feats. [/quote]
IIRC, a monk's SR is 10+level, which means you'll be able to ignore 45% of the spells flung at you by an equal level mage. That's hardly shabby.
Fourth, the monk has no way to boost the DC of his abilities wihtout boosting his stats. Couple this with feeble DCs and you can see why most of the monk abilities that affect others never work. This is easily remedied by adding feats that help.
KI STRAPS! Best thing for monks since... well, I can't think of anything, but they are good.
Monks should not play like fighters. They are not fighters any more than a rogue is a fighter. If the rogue goes toe to toe with a golem he will probably die, yet no one whines that rogues are weak.
But rogues have damage protential that monks don't have.
The monk is a spec-ops guy. He is not a shock trooper. The monk uses his stealth and skills to get close to high-value, soft targets (usually mages and priests) and takes them out. His abilities are almost tailor made to be able to disable spellcasters. He has good saves, evasion, high speed and does significant damage. He is also a compentent spy and infiltrator. Basically the perfect spec-ops guy. If players learn to use the monk properly its abilities do shine (as much as the PHB allows anyway). If you want to go toe-to-toe with a giant or a golem, play a fighter.
But the thing is, in a typical DnD campaign, the niche that the monk fills just doesn't help out the party that much.
