D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a 3.5 monk?

[Dandu]

Here's the thing: the fewer levels you spend in Monk... the better your monk is.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

actually, the problem I have with monks is how another player in our group plays them, ive always wanted one, kinda...but he ruined them for me

if you want to know how, prepare for one hell of a rant, if not then dont ask, lol

 

[Dandu]

Go ahead, just spoiler it.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Here's the thing: the fewer levels you spend in Monk... the better your monk is.

Maybe I'm gimping my builds, but their main class by # of levels is always either Monk or Monk PrCls. The Gameday monk had only three Kensai levels- the rest was all Monk.

The githzerai was slated to take levels in Lucid Cenobite (a Hyperconscious Monk PrCl), which would have required a couple levels of PsyWar, but again, the bulk of his levels were to be in Monk. (The campaign died before a single PsyWar level was taken.)

 

[Dandu]

Well, the most usefulness I can see getting out of monk is level 6. More than that and you really run into the realm of diminishing returns.

But the basic thing I notice is that the most powerful monk builds tend to run along the lines of Monk1-2/Druid18-19, Swordsage 20, Monk2/Psychic Warrior 18 with Talashadora, and Fistbeard Beardfist, Ranger1/Monk2/Ranger3/Deepwarden2/Fist of the Forest3/Kensai10...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well, the most usefulness I can see getting out of monk is level 6. More than that and you really run into the realm of diminishing returns.

I can guarantee NOBODY has ever accused me of being an optimizer- well, except for a 2Ed Player's Option cleric...who really wasn't- so I'm not saying you're wrong. However, nobody ever looked at one of my Monks in game and called them weak.

 

[Dandu]

How strong or weak a class is at the gaming table has a lot to do with the people you play with and the enemies that you face. Don't really know what your groups are like, but when I look at it from a mechanical perspective, I just don't see you getting much out of the investment after a certain point compared to other classes that you could have taken or multiclassed into.

And I'm not saying you can't make a monk good, but you're working uphill compared to other classes.

 

[Nifft]

Monks have exceptionally solid defenses, so they're great as one side of a Gestalt character. You're free to go full-on ALL ATTACK, ALL THE TIME with your other side.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm not saying you can't make a monk better, but you're working uphill compared to classes. If you'd care to put up some monks that you've used, feel free to. I'd be interested in seeing how other people build them since I generally get out after level 2.

I'm not making any claims about better or working uphill because that stuff doesn't matter to me at all. As long as I'm having fun and contributing to the party's successes, I don't care if I never have a single über moment in the campaign.

That said, I emphasize Dex/Wis/Con to maximize defenses and the other stuff I mentioned upthread. Feats typically emphasized are the Combat areflexes feat tree, with occasional ventures into the exotic, like Ring The Golden Bell.

When I use dex builds, I make sure the PC has a good ranged weapon or suite of weapons...a Quiver of Ehlonna is high on my wish list for such PCs. A crossbow for alpha strikes, javelins or grenades of some kind for continuing ranged work as you dance around the battlefield.

Oh yeah- and unlike the way some play their Str monks, don't succumb to the temptation to play the monk as a front-liner like Ftrs, Brbs and the like. You don't just stand there and trade blows, you stay mobile.

 

[Dandu]

I'm not making any claims about better or working uphill because that stuff doesn't matter to me at all. As long as I'm having fun and contributing to the party's successes, I don't care if I never have a single über moment in the campaign.

It's good that you have fun. Powerful or weak classes aren't inherently fun or not fun to play; a lot of it does depend on the setting. That being said, I tend to look at things from a mechanistic point of view when asked questions about classes so without further ado...

That said, I emphasize Dex/Wis/Con to maximize defenses and the other stuff I mentioned upthread. Feats typically emphasized are the Combat areflexes feat tree, with occasional ventures into the exotic, like Ring The Golden Bell.

When I use dex builds, I make sure the PC has a good ranged weapon or suite of weapons...a Quiver of Ehlonna is high on my wish list for such PCs. A crossbow for alpha strikes, javelins or grenades of some kind for continuing ranged work as you dance around the battlefield.

Oh yeah- and unlike the way some play their Str monks, don't succumb to the temptation to play the monk as a front-liner like Ftrs, Brbs and the like. You don't just stand there and trade blows, you stay mobile.

I get the feeling that you are describing a style of play that involves "skirmishing" around the battlefield, using ranged attacks, and harassing the enemy.

Scouts do this well, since they get Skirmish. Barbarians can do it, since they get Pounce. Monks... get an enhancement bonus to speed that can be bought as an item and tumble. That restricts them to a single attack action each round during mobile combat.

Mobile warfare is great, but the monk doesn't really support it. Heck, their iconic class feature dictates that you stand still in order to use it...