Wizard vs. Monk...Winner?

[Aloïsius]

Not in the core rules, and if there was a custom item it would be ridiculously expensive (probably an epic item).

A scroll would be good for a rogue, however... It's a cross-class skill in 3.5 for all other class, IIRC ?

[/i]

And return, healed, buffed, and ready to go. That's the problem for the monk in this scenario.

So, "freeze the lifeblood" is the best tactic, I guess.

 

[Storm Raven]

These duels pretty much come down to who wins initiative.

The moment you start throwing preps and buffs in like Contingent Teleport or Monk designed to kill wizards, you'll generally have to favor the most prepared.

On the wizard side I'm trying to go with reasonable options. Most 20th level wizards (in my opinion) are likely to have some sort of contingency in place, and teleport is a pretty common contingent spell. Most of the spells I've put forward as options are likely to be on the majority of wizard's spell lists, and many are likely to be prepared: 20th level wizards often prepare time stop, meteor swarm, teleport, and so on. Even true strike is probably pretty common (to power high value touch attack spells).

 

[Storm Raven]

A scroll would be good for a rogue, however... It's a cross-class skill in 3.5 for all other class, IIRC ?

Maybe. But this isn't rogue v. wizard.

So, "freeze the lifeblood" is the best tactic, I guess.

Probably, and it still doesn't have a great chance of succeeding.

 

[tylermalan]

Alright then, a few things (some of which I forgot to mention in the beginning)...

One thing is that this debate WAS in only 3E, not 3.5. I remembered this because of my second thing, which is that we agreed to only use the core books, so nothing from the Complete books (or rather, the 3E splat books) is allowed.

Psi, I never thought about the shapechanging thing to avoid the stuns, but that's a really good point.

Thanee, I love you. Did I ever tell you that? Concise, good stuff, which I also love. But 100% of the time?

However, if the Wizard underestimates the Monk, he may wind up losing the fight. Using anecdotal evidence: The evil demonologist PC was looking for a virgin sacrifice to Grazz't and he came across a girl with one of those poles with two buckets, one on either end. He was a 15th-level Wizard, and he didn't know it, but she was a 6th-level Monk. He needed her alive for the sacrifice and he thought she was a commoner from her dress, so he started with a weak spell, with no real buffs up, and she smacked him upside the head with the bucket-pole several times and managed to kill him. She was promptly sainted by the local church.

It was agreed upon that we would build our characters specifically to fight each other, including the purchasing of magic items and the memorizing of spells, which means that They both know what they'll be up against (except specifics like stats and items carried etc...), and they'll be fully prepared for the fight ahead of time. This takes out a lot of answers that a few others have given as well.

a Monk made solely for a dual vs a wizard would have a chance...and a good one.
with improved evasion.. high saves.. some good items.. and he is untouchable from anything that allows a save.
Monks usually have a higher initiative first too...
And a monk got something called spell resistance.. that will make some of the wizzies spells fail.

I disagree with most of this. While I agree that the monk would have a chance, I wouldn't go so far as to say he has a GOOD one. Considering the evasion and saves argument, Fizdabulous' save DC was at 33-38 or something, requiring, like I previously stated, the monk to roll 18s to save against the level 9 damage stuff, which isn't likely to happen too often.

The one who goes first wins.

I also disagree, I would say that the wizard still has a decidedly high chance to win even IF he loses initiative, while the monk's survivability drastically lowers if HE loses. I also disagree with the "Same CR fight" post, 50% doesn't seem logical to me.

So let's do this, here's 2 examples, and you guys can tell me what you think:

1) Everything I said above, where the wizard and monk are both built to fight each other, and are totally prepared on that day with everything they need. In addition, they start on the Prime Material Plane 200 ft. away from each other, neither surprised. Considering that initiative has NOT been rolled yet, who would win?

2) Same example as above, but the builds are average - meaning the wizard has all the "typically good" spells in the book, and they both have magic items that just make them a "better wizard" or a "better monk" (as opposed to a wizard killer or a monk killer). They start under the same circumstances. Without going into a debate about which spells are the "typically good" spells and such, would the outcome be any different than the above example?

In addition to all this, I'm still wondering why so many people think Monks are underpowered, because even though I think the wizard would win in the above situations, I can't think of any other classes that would stand a chance one-on-one against a monk.

 

[Zimbel]

Like any other "Same CR" fight, this one has exactly 50% chance of going either way.

CR is a rough measure of the resources that a party of 4 disperately-classed PCs of the same level (at one time, C/W/F/R was standard) would take to defeat that creature. For example, if the party and the creature were the same level, the party should need to expend roughly 20% of their resources.

The problem with using CR for this sort of fight is:
Each combatant has a fraction of the resources of a party, and are typically skewed heavily in certain directions (Wizards typically aren't good melee combatants; Monks aren't good spellcasters). If that combatant dosen't have the right resources to deal with this particular threat, then this threat will be comesurately more difficult for that combatant.

Monks typically don't have an effective way to shut down most of the combat ability of a Wizard if both are at high levels. Wizards do have the ability to shut down most of the combat ability of most Monks.

To think of it another way, a Huge Shark is CR4. It should be able to eat a LV 1 Fighter alive (literally). However, assume that the Shark is in a shallow tank, and the fighter is in a heavily fortified platform well above the Shark's ability to jump, with a quiver (or three) full of arrows.

Who wins?

If you think that this is an unfair analogy (since the monk isn't in a tank, and could dimension door out anyway), the problem is that the Wizard can effectively create a tank. Whether that's a forcecage, prismatic sphere, prismatic walls, walls of force, flying above the monk, teleporting in and out, casting then moving w/ improved invis, or simply leaving the prime material plane, the Monk can't do much about it - unless the Wizard never gets a chance to act.

Now, if you were talking about a LV 1 Wizard vs a LV 1 monk, my answer would reverse- the Wizard's only hope is a failed save on round 1; the chances are low that the wizard would get the second round to act.

 

[Thanee]

2. Mildly so - the monk's spell resistance will work on about half of the wizard's spells that allow for it. But I'm a 20th level wizard, I have spells to burn.

Even a core rules only wizard can beat it 100% of the time, 80%+ without PrC (from the DMG).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Zimbel]

1) Everything I said above, where the wizard and monk are both built to fight each other, and are totally prepared on that day with everything they need. In addition, they start on the Prime Material Plane 200 ft. away from each other, neither surprised. Considering that initiative has NOT been rolled yet, who would win?

2) Same example as above, but the builds are average - meaning the wizard has all the "typically good" spells in the book, and they both have magic items that just make them a "better wizard" or a "better monk" (as opposed to a wizard killer or a monk killer). They start under the same circumstances. Without going into a debate about which spells are the "typically good" spells and such, would the outcome be any different than the above example?

In addition to all this, I'm still wondering why so many people think Monks are underpowered, because even though I think the wizard would win in the above situations, I can't think of any other classes that would stand a chance one-on-one against a monk.

1) Wizard, 100% (assuiming both are played and preped well). Even assuming that the Monk wins init, the Wizard would have an appropriate contingency to deal with that.
2) Wizard, 100% (assuming core). The Monk is simply too far to take out the Wizard round 1. Going beyond core, it might drop to 80% or so (with the possibility that the Monk could get init, and keep continual stun until death).

Finally, I'm curious as to why you think, for example, that a Sorcerer couldn't do the same. Or a well-crafted Cleric. Or a well-crafted Druid. I'm also curious why you think that a Monk has an advantage against, say, a Fighter.

 

[Merlion]

I can't think of any other classes that would stand a chance one-on-one against a monk.

Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian.

The only classes I'd say a Monk really had all that good a chance against would be Rogue, Bard, maybe Ranger, and maybe a Mage if the circumstances where right, as has been discussed here.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian.

The only classes I'd say a Monk really had all that good a chance against would be Rogue, Bard, maybe Ranger, and maybe a Mage if the circumstances where right, as has been discussed here.

It depends on if it's a crazy loony monk with the right PrCs. Something like Monk/ShouDisciple/NinjaoftheCrescentMoon dual wielding martial weapons for a flurry can really slaughter things.

 

[Merlion]

well, when I say "monk" (or any other class) I mean "monk" (or whatever other class). A mutlcclassed or prestige classed character isnt just a "monk" or a "whatever" anymore its a Monk/Whatever/Whatever.

Certainly prestige classes make a difference, but they to me are seperate.