Why do all paladins, monks, and druids seem exactly the same?

[Elephant]

The question is, how many of these did you actually seen played?

I saw one played once, and boy, was it painful.

First, the player couldn't distinguish "highly exalted" from "incredibly vulgar". A monk who grapples foes while taunting them with vulgar phrases is a playable concept, but as VoP? No.

Second, the player had no concept of running a high-WIS character. One example is that, even at 15th level, the PC had a penchant for running way ahead and getting into combat while the rest of the party was still 1-3 rounds away.

Third, the player suggested several times that the party buy potions of various buffing spells to feed to his monk. C'mon, you take the feat, you get the benefit (and the DM was overly lenient, allowing the rampant vulgarity to slide), don't ask the rest of the party to handicap themselves to further boost your character.

And he STILL wasn't all that effective.

 

[Warren Okuma]

I saw one played once, and boy, was it painful.

First, the player couldn't distinguish "highly exalted" from "incredibly vulgar". A monk who grapples foes while taunting them with vulgar phrases is a playable concept, but as VoP? No.

Second, the player had no concept of running a high-WIS character. One example is that, even at 15th level, the PC had a penchant for running way ahead and getting into combat while the rest of the party was still 1-3 rounds away.

Third, the player suggested several times that the party buy potions of various buffing spells to feed to his monk. C'mon, you take the feat, you get the benefit (and the DM was overly lenient, allowing the rampant vulgarity to slide), don't ask the rest of the party to handicap themselves to further boost your character.

And he STILL wasn't all that effective.

Ah lucky, he didn't think about being a naturally large grappler to boot.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm glad no one has picked the OBVIOUS answer...

"because they are too narrow an archetype to be a base class. They should be PrCs"

Thanks for not trotting that old horse out again...

 

[LoneWolf23]

Well, to a certain extent, the Paladin, Monk and Druid are a bit archetypical... But it's really a matter of creative customizing.

 

[The Human Target]

I'm glad no one has picked the OBVIOUS answer...

"because they are too narrow an archetype to be a base class. They should be PrCs"

Thanks for not trotting that old horse out again...

Hold on, I haven;t gotten to post yet.

The Paladin should be a PRC no question.

The druid should be as well.

The monk is perfectly valid as a class concept or a PRC. Its just been done poorly.

 

[Elephant]

Ah lucky, he didn't think about being a naturally large grappler to boot.

Naturally large? The character was human.

He did ask for Enlarge [strike]Mooch[/strike] Person quite a bit, but it didn't end up being all that helpful later on in the campaign - most monsters were coming in groups, good enough at grappling that he only had limited success, or both.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Naturally large? The character was human.

He did ask for Enlarge [strike]Mooch[/strike] Person quite a bit, but it didn't end up being all that helpful later on in the campaign - most monsters were coming in groups, good enough at grappling that he only had limited success, or both.

See, poor design. Must be naturally large or bigger.

 

[molonel]

Um ... they don't?