Monk Class Unhittable?

Remove all ads!

Okay, first of all I dont like 3E rules lol, but hey, im gonna give this game a whirl.

I just thought the idea of a wicked lvl20monk rolling 2d6 and good halfing dodge and reflex saving and mobility dodging, and AC bonus from Dex18=4 Wis14=2.

Anyway i just started and no one can hit me lol, Gangleader in the jail reigon? Peice of cake

Anyone else got an opinion on the monk?

 

well, a lvl20 fighter would probably dish out 2d6+15 damage instead and have the same armor if not better. A monks dex and wis to ac just can't compete with the 12ac bonus from a +4 fullplate.

The monk is powerful against spellcasters due to their nutty saves, and get a lot of neat abilities, but if you are looking for someone to fight beasties, a fighter is better imo.

I dislike the monk in the idea I always play a wizard myself And the monk is usually the best one to win in that battle.

 

Yeah, I'm getting this sneaking suspicion that a well equipped level 20 monk can not be hit by any weapon and is in effect immune to spells.

Waiting for a response...

 

of course he can be hit by a weapon. I would consider his ac lower compared to the other frontliners.

The one reason is that a monk cannot use any armor with any apparent benefit. Spells on the other hand.. got me there, hehe.

At later levels, almost any class who wins the initiative, can take out another one. Especially if the wizard is first to act.

[This message has been edited by Lokken (edited July 10, 2002).]

 

I think the question here is what Earl thinks is "well equipped" I mean with dodge modifiers, and such, it is possible that a monk could be "unhittable" but not "unpenetratable." The higher AC for a fighter is one thing, but if he's not able to move out of the way of hits, then he becomes an easier target. Monk speed, AC modifiers, dodge modifiers, immunity to types of wounds (slash, pierce), immunity to disease and poison (monk skills) extra turning, flurry of blows, etc, all give the monk a slight edge in melee, in my opinion.

I too have been using a monk, and I'll tell you, the fight with Desther DID take a while, but the poor guy could barely hit me at all....I think he got like 2 shots in. I had Sharwyn there to beef me up and add even more to my ability to evade. I have notice, as did the originator of the thread, that for every 2 hits I take, generally, I dish out about 5. Most enemies are dead before they get the chance to take a second swing.

Thanks,
Atheris




[This message has been edited by Atheris (edited July 10, 2002).]

 

Actually as for armour class, In BG2 my monk had -18AC when Korgan with a +5 sheild had around -13! Has the monk AC abilities been lowered?

Also what is the belt that lets you used DEX as the modifier for 'to hit' instead of STR? Another thing, my friend uses a monk and he thinks we wont even hurt each other, if we can both find the blunt-weapon absorbing belt :S

 

Just my view....

The game balance is made up of the following factors in 3rd edition rules (even if NWN doesn't implement them as is, faaaaar from it, but they have done a good job.)

Total to hit vs total AC.
Weapon damage vs Base HP die.
Damage bonus vs CON bonus to HP and Damage resistance.
Total Spell DC vs Saves (and some times HP)
Total spell caster level vs Spell resistance.
Skill vs skill, etc, etc.

In order to be inpervious to one or more ways of being killed you need an exceptionell value, since most of the above are based on a scale of 1 to 20 (the d20 die) and even higher values. This means that you need 19 more than the opponent (you roll 1 and opponent roll a 20!) in order to be sure of success. In the RPG the 1 transfers to -10 and the crit becomes a +30...

Some die rolls are never made, like the defensive AC roll, you automatically takes a 10 on that one. This translates to you needing an AC value of 10 more than the attackers attackbonus, which of course is feasable, especially when you are a low level char facing a low level mob.

All of the above values are connected to your level. A fighting class should have more than +1 per level in total to hit. And a spellcaster less than +1 per level. The same goes for most of the values. If it is a primary value for your class (be it skill, AC, damage bonus, etc) you should have a value above your level.

So the real thing is that you compare your strenght towards the enemies weakneses and vice versa. Some times you come out on top, sometimes not.

The Biggest problem is monsters that usually have +1 to hit if they are low level creatures, and a fighter can start with AC 21 easily (if he has got the cash.) The problem is that the monsters will increase their to hit by +1 every level at the very least. The fighter will not be able to do that and neither will the monk. This means that sooner or later the monsters will catch up and then some, maybe even get a second attack in once in awhile. When at higher level the multi attacks comes into play in a big way and it's not a matter of the fighter hitting you, it's a matter of how many times he will hit you.

The big problems are big money initially, which might give you horribly unbalanced items that blows the delicate d20 vs d20 balance and the second problem is your abilities, they are way to high initially and raises way to slow during game (the reason why the monk can rule at low levels, since his AC bonuses doesn't cost any money but when the fighter gets his magic plate (and shield) or chain shirt if he has got lots of dex it balances out pretty well).

NWN has taken care of the money problem by prohibit costly magic item to low level characters and there are a lot of magic items that improves your characteristics. This is not in according to the 3rdE rules, but it works in a computer game where the DM can't address the problem directly when it gets out of hand (In NWN they actually can or will if the multiplayer takes of in a big way...

I definitely don't think the game is unbalanced overall, but there might be easier times during certain levels and against certain monsters, which is as it should be, I guess. But any high level character/monster rocks lesser level opposition and are almost impervious to certain types of attacks, be it piercing or reflexsave based spells, but that only means we have to adjust to different circumstances.

A versatile character/party is allways the best way to go, unless you want to sail effortlessly through half of the encounters and have severe problems with the other half.

A monk might be inpervious to lesser minions attacks, but the boss monsters might shake him up. A wizard will fry the lesser minions with a fireball so they are no problem either, but the boss monsters will probably take a fireball and still pose a problem.

/Niltz

 

Evokers, go away! I beg of you, hehe

To kill a boss, you use a death spell with a boosted DC and kill them straight out.

as for fighter vs monk, the fighter gets many many more feats he can use on ac, attack giving thingies.

 

Niltz, I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, but your analysis is slightly flawed there, since a natural 20 always hits (thus an attack of 20 + 0 against an AC of [10 +10 = 20] is a hit, or an AC of [10 + 20 = 30]).

"The Biggest problem is monsters that usually have +1 to hit if they are low level creatures, and a fighter can start with AC 21 easily (if he has got the cash.) The problem is that the monsters will increase their to hit by +1 every level at the very least. The fighter will not be able to do that and neither will the monk."

Couple of things:
Most creatures have greater than +1 to Attack as their base, if not for melee than at least for range.

It is almost impossible for a low-level (1-3)Fighter to have an AC above 20 without sacrificing something (usually Attack and Damage) or through magical means. The highest combination of AC (for normal character class/race combinations and without magic items) through Dex and Armour is +8 (+10 with a large steel shield). The higher the bonus due to armour, the lower the bonus from Dex.

A fighter gains +1 to their Attack roll every level. Then add in bonuses from Str, Dex, and feats. All other classes gain less.

"When at higher level the multi attacks comes into play in a big way and it's not a matter of the fighter hitting you, it's a matter of how many times he will hit you."

Your primary attack will always be at least +5 better than your secondary attack, and +10 than a third attack. Therefore when fighting an equally challenging opponent (either with a high AC, high Attack, or high Damage) the secondary and third attacks become less important. If it's a high AC opponent, then your second and third attacks won't hit very often at all. If it's a high Attack opponent, then they are just as likely to hit you and you are to them, and it's a wash (comes down to randomness, and damage done). Mutliple attacks will only make a difference if they are from two-weapon fighting (with feats that nullify an minuses), when fighting a lesser opponent, or fighting an opponent that is deemed to be challenging for reasons other than AC or Attack (such as magic or special abilities).

"The big problems are big money initially, which might give you horribly unbalanced items that blows the delicate d20 vs d20 balance and the second problem is your abilities, they are way to high initially and raises way to slow during game (the reason why the monk can rule at low levels, since his AC bonuses doesn't cost any money but when the fighter gets his magic plate (and shield) or chain shirt if he has got lots of dex it balances out pretty well)."

Actually, at first level, most things balance out perfectly (big money should not be an issue, since the amount of money for each class also differs based on their equipment needs). While the monk's AC is not related to equipment, the max AC for a monk at levels 1-3 is 20, or +10 (not including magical means). The max Dex for normal characters is 20 (+5 mod to AC) and the max Wis would be 18 (+4 mod to AC). An additional bonus could come from the Size modifier (+1 for being small). Monk's don't gain the monk AC bonus until level 2. A fighter or cleric could also have an AC of 20: Dex of 18 (+4) or 20 (+5), armour of +4 (or +3 if you want the +5 dex bonus) and a large shield (+2). Since a small creature (+1 AC for size) would be unable to use a large shield, the max is still 20 (+1 size and only +1 for a shield).

"NWN has taken care of the money problem by prohibit costly magic item to low level characters and there are a lot of magic items that improves your characteristics. This is not in according to the 3rdE rules, but it works in a computer.."

Um, yes it is in accordance with the 3rd E rules. Magic items are supposed to be uncommon and costly, and can come in many, many different forms. For the first part of the NWN game, it is either hard to find a magical item, or hard to get the money. Your character will be at least 4th or 5th level by the time they can (your 3rd level when you start Chapter 1 proper, after the prologue).

In short, yes, most things balance out one way or another. But not all classes are meant for straight-up fighting. Rogues and cleric's have a lower hit-die, and usually do less damage, even though their AC will likely be in the same range. Hence, fighter types (and to some extent, mages and monks) are usually balanced in battle. Clerics and Rogues are at a slight disadvantage in battle, but more useful for the other components of the game.

 

At 20th level in NWN, warriors should have high ACs - at least AC35 and many (be it monks, fighters, etc.) will have AC40 or more. With magic, an AC60 has been reported. Perhaps, the monk has a slight advantage at very high levels with AC.

A roll of 20 always hits and because of various modifiers, the primary attack of a warrior should usually hit. The purpose of AC with high level characters is to block the other multiple attacks. And that most certainly does matter. Of course, AC will vary with warriors and monsters depending on the equipment and focus of the character or monster (defense or offense, for instance).

If the underlying assumption behind this thread is "monks are the powergamer's dream because they can't be hit," then I am inclined to disagree. I've not yet dueled to answer this question, but I feel that a multiclass warrior would usually defeat any pure class warrior and sometimes the mage (depending on the mage's initiative, distance, etc.). I can tell you with absolute certainty that in PnP RPGA tournaments, my multiclass barbarian (level 5) will easily defeat a monk of my level or even a few levels higher.

Monks do enjoy great saving throws.