# Is the Monk overpowered?



## Zaran (May 25, 2010)

Has anyone compared the power of the monk class to that of other strikers?  It seems that the monk has both high damage powers and powers that cause conditions.  I've always enjoyed the monk and want to know if the class is as overpowered as it seems at first look.


----------



## Mentat55 (May 25, 2010)

I don't think anyone has described the monk as overpowered up to this point.  Compared to rangers and rogues, the monk does not seem to generate nearly as much single target damage, and despite its ability to deal damage to multiple foes, the monk does not match the sorcerer in this arena.

I think the monk stands out as being an implement power user that goes into melee and has very high mobility.  I would not call either of these features overpowered.


----------



## Herschel (May 25, 2010)

Yeah, most people complain about teh monk being UNDERpowered. I think it's an interesting idea, but plays much differently than other strikers.


----------



## Zaran (May 25, 2010)

I looked at multiclassing into a monk with my fighter. Doing that would make my 8th level fighter do 8 pts of extra damage for free once an encounter. 10 pts if it's to another foe. One would be hard pressed to do that with any other single feat.


----------



## keterys (May 25, 2010)

The rogue multiclass works similarly (7 at Heroic, 10.5 at Paragon, 17.5 at Epic), the ranger gives +3.5/7/10.5 for 2 rounds, and the barbarian multiclass gives +2 for the entire combat.

And I would definitely not call monks overpowered.


----------



## MrMyth (May 25, 2010)

Zaran said:


> I looked at multiclassing into a monk with my fighter. Doing that would make my 8th level fighter do 8 pts of extra damage for free once an encounter. 10 pts if it's to another foe. One would be hard pressed to do that with any other single feat.




It's actually pretty close to the other multiclassing striker feats. Since it is stat-based rather than simply bonus damage dice, it is potentially higher for those with higher base stats. But 1-3 points of extra damage once per encounter isn't a gamebreaker.

I think you would be hard pressed to demonstrate the monk is overpowered. Being tied to implements somewhat limits damage, and it is hard to match the accuracy of the rogue or the multiple attacks of the ranger. I think the monk is perfectly respectable and can be built to be very effective - but isn't going to break the game any time soon.


----------



## Obryn (May 25, 2010)

Zaran said:


> I looked at multiclassing into a monk with my fighter. Doing that would make my 8th level fighter do 8 pts of extra damage for free once an encounter. 10 pts if it's to another foe. One would be hard pressed to do that with any other single feat.



Multiclass feats tend to be better than other feats, partly because of the opportunity cost of taking one.

Frankly, I think Battle Awareness and the Avenger multiclass feats are beefier than the monk one....

-O


----------



## chitzk0i (May 25, 2010)

Monks with their meager hit points get hated _hard_ by auras and swarms.  It's frustrating with swarms, where a monk may deal the most damage against them, but can't take the heat from the swarm attack.


----------



## Rechan (May 25, 2010)

The monk in our group can use all his encounter/daily powers and things aren't dead yet. And he's right beside the barbarian in terms of hanging onto consciousness by a thread.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (May 25, 2010)

The barbarian is hanging on?  I can't damage him enough.  He gets temporary hit points and DR constantly.  I also have a monk in my group (a goliath barbarian and a human monk).  Either one shines at different points, but I don't really think it's fair to say they're overpowered.  They're just good at that particular thing.  The main concern I would have with people new to the monk is the movement stuff.  Their powers do not grant an additional move action (so not two move actions plus a minor plus a standard in one round).  Granted, we started this way before PH3 was published...


----------



## Rechan (May 25, 2010)

The barb in our group goes down at _least_ once a fight.


----------



## keterys (May 25, 2010)

My goliath barbarian's only been taken down once I think... he just hit 18th. Mind you, he's a lot more fragile than the heavy armor expertise days where I was deliberately acting as a second defender.


----------



## Dice4Hire (May 25, 2010)

Zaran said:


> I looked at multiclassing into a monk with my fighter. Doing that would make my 8th level fighter do 8 pts of extra damage for free once an encounter. 10 pts if it's to another foe. One would be hard pressed to do that with any other single feat.




The barbarian one in PHBII gives +2 to damage for the encounter once per day. That could easily be a lot of damage.


----------



## mysticknight232 (May 25, 2010)

In my LFR campaign, I play a Centered Breath Monk and my friend plays a Brutal Rogue using daggers for improved hits.  We are the only 2 strikers in our party and we have only played 3 adventures so far (our party is lvl 2).  We both decided we were going to track our stats to see who did the most dmg including dmg per hit as we have been having this debate as well.  Our group feels that my Monk is deals more dmg than his Rogue does at this point in the experiment.  

My personal opinion is that at Heroic tier, the Monk will continue to deal more dmg.  I feel the FoB power dealing static dmg every time I hit is favorable to dealing sneak attack dmg only when you're granted CA.  We try to flank every opportunity we can, but it doesn't always happen.  

Now, Once we reach Paragon lvl, I'm thinking we might begin to see a difference.  The Rogue can add an extra die to the dmg, not to mention taking a feat to increase the dmg die size.  So at paragon lvl, he could be dealing an extra 3d8 sneak attack dmg while i'm still dealing my base dmg (5 points currently at lvl 2) to up to 2 creatures.  At that point, I feel that the Monk will continue to deal an xtra 5 to 8 dmg per turn (assuming 1 target every turn) while the Rogue will start to out dmg me by dealing 3d8 dmg from sneak attack.  I have taken the Pointed Step Style Feat to grant my FoB range of 2 squares.  This obviously isn't increasing my dmg output directly, but it may allow me to be more effective at paragon lvl in targeting a 2nd target.  

So to summarize, our party feels that the Monk is out dmging the Rogue at this point but we intend to track it and see.


----------



## keterys (May 25, 2010)

I'd be curious to know how many rounds, percentage-wise, the rogue doesn't get to trigger his sneak attack. I suspect that's a huge decider on that comparison.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (May 26, 2010)

keterys said:


> I'd be curious to know how many rounds, percentage-wise, the rogue doesn't get to trigger his sneak attack. I suspect that's a huge decider on that comparison.




The rogue really should be working to get sneak attack in as much as humanly possible.

And Backstabber is one of the highest-output damage feats.  It's +2 damage/hit on average at heroic, as long as you have combat advantage.

If the rogue's not getting combat advantage, then his damage is going to be way down.

For my brutal rogue, I used a rapier, since that made the die rolling easier, and as I've mentioned before, I hate rolling d4s.

Brad


----------



## Mort_Q (May 26, 2010)

cignus_pfaccari said:


> I hate rolling d4s.
> 
> Brad




I used to as well.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (May 26, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> I used to as well.




Oooo, nifty.  Much better than those d8-imitators.

But back to the subject:  Yeah, I'd love to play a monk, but there are just so many freaking auras out there that it makes me think WTF?

Brad


----------



## Infiniti2000 (May 26, 2010)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> The rogue really should be working to get sneak attack in as much as humanly possible.



Who said he's human?


----------



## cdrcjsn (May 26, 2010)

keterys said:


> I'd be curious to know how many rounds, percentage-wise, the rogue doesn't get to trigger his sneak attack. I suspect that's a huge decider on that comparison.




This is true.

Player tactical ability plays a greater factor in how often rogue sneak damage gets applied.  I know one guy that's fairly clueless and he gets one sneak attack per encounter at most.


----------



## Rechan (May 26, 2010)

cdrcjsn said:


> Player tactical ability plays a greater factor in how often rogue sneak damage gets applied.



Power choice also. There are SO MANY options that give targets CA.


----------



## Saagael (May 26, 2010)

I recently got a monk to join my campaign at level 12, so I can't say how heroic tier works, but for the 3 or 4 combats he's been in so far I'll say that the monk, when built with some forethought is pretty dang beefy. Maybe not the best damage output, but he's got the highest AC in the group. Most of this stems from a series of feats he grabbed to make hitting him nearly impossible in certain situations. He's got the following, if I'm remembering it all correctly:

Deadly Draw: When you slide/pull an enemy adjacent, gain CA against that foe.
Unarmored Agility: +2 to AC
Defensive Mobility: +2 to AC vs OAs
Defensive Advantage: +2 to AC against enemies he has CA against.
Opportunistic Withdrawal: Doesn't provoke OAs for moving from enemies he has CA against.
Eyes in the Back of Your Head: Doesn't grant CA when flanked.
He also has Boots of the Fencing Master, which is another +1 to AC and Reflex nearly every turn.

The first turn he moves up to one baddie and hits it, slides it with FoB next to him, which gives him CA due to deadly draw. At this point he's at +2 AC (+3 if he shifted from the power), and can get out of there without worrying about OAs since he has CA.

Not only that, but enemies can mob up on him, and he not only doesn't grant CA for flanking, but he most likely has +3 AC from having combat advnatage and having shifted, and can just saunter away without taking any opportunity attacks (maybe 1 or 2, but he still has +2 AC vs those).

Needless to say, he's about as hard to hit as a paladin, even if his damage output is mediocre (not to mention all the shifting he does to enemies).


----------



## Otterscrubber (May 26, 2010)

They seemed overpowered when I read them, auto hit , auto amount of damage, spread out the damage if you want, plus sweet movement options and controlling ability.  But in play they seemed just fine.


----------



## DracoSuave (May 26, 2010)

Otterscrubber said:


> They seemed overpowered when I read them, auto hit , auto amount of damage, spread out the damage if you want, plus sweet movement options and controlling ability.  But in play they seemed just fine.




Monks are no more autohit than Rangers or Rogues or Warlocks.


----------



## Tarrl (May 27, 2010)

What do you all think about the assassin multiclass feat, Assassin's Shroud in comparsion to the other multiclass feats a monk can take, like the rogue or ranger one for extra dam an encounter?


----------



## hvg3akaek (May 27, 2010)

We have a mini-game going currently, with a rotating DM and a bunch of strikers.  This round, we had a rogue and a monk as the party, and I don't think there was a single round where the rogue couldn't get his sneak attack off.  Partly, being a drow helped (with darkfire / globe of darkness), but even then he had a handfull of other ways to get CA.  The monk paled in comparison with raw damge out-put, but greatly excells in mobility and minion-cleansing.  Both seem quite fun to play, but the monk is definitely not overpowered


----------



## Argyle King (May 27, 2010)

I wouldn't call the Monk overpowered, but I would say the monk is far better than many people (many claiming it's underpowered) seem to think.  While the monk doesn't do as much single target damage as some of the other strikers, having some control ability is very nice.  It's also possible for the monk to have really good defenses.  Don't underestimate the movement abilities either; the monk in the game I'm currently playing is constantly zipping around all over the battlefield and raining down the hurt on enemies.


Monk is very good, but, much like the 3E monk, you have to play the monk like a monk instead of trying to play it like a different class.  


I might argue that the PHB3 in general is somewhat overpowered compared to the previous 4E books though.  There are a few options which seem to obviously make older options obsolete.


----------



## Budalic (May 27, 2010)

cdrcjsn said:


> This is true.
> 
> Player tactical ability plays a greater factor in how often rogue sneak damage gets applied.  I know one guy that's fairly clueless and he gets one sneak attack per encounter at most.




If the rogue player doesn't get the CA 90% of time, he shouldn't play a rogue.

And there are always leader and controller to help him/her with the remaining 10%


----------



## Droogie128 (May 27, 2010)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I wouldn't call the Monk overpowered, but I would say the monk is far better than many people (many claiming it's underpowered) seem to think.  While the monk doesn't do as much single target damage as some of the other strikers, having some control ability is very nice.  It's also possible for the monk to have really good defenses.  Don't underestimate the movement abilities either; the monk in the game I'm currently playing is constantly zipping around all over the battlefield and raining down the hurt on enemies.
> 
> 
> Monk is very good, but, much like the 3E monk, you have to play the monk like a monk instead of trying to play it like a different class.
> ...




Such as?


----------



## Black Knight Irios (May 27, 2010)

Droogie128 said:


> Such as?




Things like Versatile Expertise I guess. But then again that's perfectly ok at my table.


----------



## Zaran (May 27, 2010)

I don't know.  It seems like every Monk Daily is an area effect with multiple dice of damage.   I realize that the monk's secondary is controller but it seems like that would make a war mage wizard obsolete in dealing damage to multiple foes.


----------



## korjik (May 27, 2010)

The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6. Rangers and warlocks have to spend a minor to get the striker damage. The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.

Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.

The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.

The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.

The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit _15_ targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).


----------



## Black Knight Irios (May 27, 2010)

korjik said:


> The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6. Rangers and warlocks have to spend a minor to get the striker damage. The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.
> 
> Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.
> 
> ...




Your comparison is flawed just b/c the monk seems to be or is better at level 1 says nothing about level 5/11/16/21/...

Make the comparison at all those levels using a variety of builds for all striker classes to prove that what you showed us at lvl1 is true for the rest of the game. I even question that your statement is true at lvl1.

So just a few points at lvl1 you seem to prove:
1) Rangers and Locks spend the minor action once per enemy most of the time not every time they want to use their feature. 
2) Ranger, Lock and Rogue can use their striker damage in melee and at range the monk is bound to melee.
3) The Rogue has Backstabber which turns 2d6 to 2d8 an average increase in damage equal to +2 just for the cost of a feat.
4) The rogue can use a dagger for his attacks which puts him +1 ahead on attack rolls. The more damage you deal the more important is to hit (except for when approaching very high hit rates).
5) I don't even want to look up every L1 Encounter and Daily of a Rogue b/c there is a boat load already published and there are some that are just awesome, same for the at-wills.
6) Rogues and Locks and Rangers have more support than the monk.

So I fail to see the overpoweredness of the monk except for if successful troll is successful = true.


----------



## the Jester (May 27, 2010)

Having seen a monk at 1st and 2nd level (in D&D Encounters) and at, oh, about 5th to 6th level, I have to say that they are a strong class; but overpowered? I don't think so, although to be honest I haven't had enough time to be sure. Yes, monks are awesomely mobile, throw people around a lot and do good damage; that's what strikers are supposed to do.

AFAICTSF they're fine.


----------



## keterys (May 27, 2010)

korjik said:


> The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6.




Sorcerers add their relevant stat to damage, actually. Rangers also just get extra attacks on their powers. 



> The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.




Assuming you're looking at the Stone Fist (Str) monk for that comparison to get your 7 damage,  a brutal scoundrel rogue also adds their Str to sneak attack damage, putting the monk 4 behind the rogue again.



> Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.




Backstabber, of course, mirroring that feat.



> The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.




Rogues are far more accurate than monks - a dagger-using rogue is 2 to hit over a monk, 3 with a feat. A rapier-using one is 1 to hit over, and deals d8 with all attacks, while the monk sometimes deals d6.



> The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.




I'd hope some of them are cool. They should all do respectable damage, some additional interesting effect, and provide an interesting movement mode. That's desirable design.



> The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit _15_ targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).




15 if you line them up extraordinarily carefully, under a blue moon, with the blessing of Shiva, and outright collusion from the DM, absolutely. Multitarget attacks are a good thing, in general, no particular problem to see there.

For example, Blinding Barrage is pretty cool.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (May 27, 2010)

I don't think monks are overpowered in general, but I do think there's something fishy about their AC. I mean, they get a +2 class bonus and they have access to a no-brainer +2 feat bonus. Why do monks need to have defender grade AC, exactly? (Same goes for avengers, while we're at it.)


----------



## MrMyth (May 27, 2010)

korjik said:


> Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.




Note, of course, that other strikers get their own damage boost feats. Note they also can invest in weapons with higher base damage dice, which will in general add a bit more damage in the long run than superior implements might. 

Rangers and Rogues also tend to get attacks as minor actions or immediate, rangers get multiple attacks all the time. They also get weapon attacks potentially vs Non-AC Defenses, for good accuracy. Sorcerers get lots of multi-target attacks with a damage bonus on everyone they hit. Warlocks still tend to be slightly lower damage, but these days not nearly by as much - and they also get more defensive tricks and gimmicks. Barbarians can use really big weapons, get damage bonuses in their powers, and can gear up for charging and other tricks. Avengers are just really accurate. 

Everyone has something going for them. Some are certainly higher up the tree than others, but all of them have something to offer, and I don't think Monk gets anything that outclasses the others. They feel pretty distinctly middle of the pack to me. 



korjik said:


> The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.




Rogues can get d8 damage, though. Or d4 with really good accuracy - plus 2d8 in Sneak Attack. Plus Strength bonus if a Brutal Scoundrel. They don't get to knock you prone or attack multiple targets, but they do get some nice options - including Piercing Strike, letting them attack Reflex for, again, really good accuracy. 



korjik said:


> The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.




1d8, 2d8, 2d10. Not bad, but not really anything to brag about. 



korjik said:


> The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit _15_ targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).




Spinning Leopard Manuever is pretty cool. But again - 3d8 isn't game-ending damage. 

For those concerned these multi-target effects will obselete the wizard... I wouldn't be. The wizard will get bigger areas that hit more targets more often. The Monk might have a few tricks like Spinning Leopard to dart across the board with more potential targets - but also without any special effects. The Wizard can hit several enemies and do very nasty things to them at the same time, and that is what their role is all about. 

The Monk is a good striker with some elements of a controller. But it isn't rendering anyone obselete. The damage on its powers are ok but not exceptional, and they get many features focused on mobility rather than outright offense or defense. Which helps them have a unique role, but similarly, many other classes remain the best at their own specific niches as well.


----------



## korjik (May 27, 2010)

You seem to miss that _controllers_ dont get multiattacks that are that good. Generally, multiple target attacks are around half damage compared to the single target attacks. This is pretty standard across all classes in the PHB1 and PHB2, but the monk is exempted.


----------



## Black Knight Irios (May 27, 2010)

korjik said:


> You seem to miss that _controllers_ dont get multiattacks that are that good. Generally, multiple target attacks are around half damage compared to the single target attacks. This is pretty standard across all classes in the PHB1 and PHB2, but the monk is exempted.




You miss the fact that controllers can use their powers (not all but many) at range and they cover larger areas. Mr. Monk has to wade into melee. The range/area benefit costs somewhere else, less damage less/weaker effects. Just take the good old Sleep, it can win an entire encounter if the DM rolls crapy for his monsters.


----------



## Stalker0 (May 27, 2010)

I wouldn't compare the monk to the rogue myself, honestly I have not been very impressed with the rogue in play. He doesn't do that much more damage and he's very frail imo.

Now when you compare the monk to a barbarian, a sorc, or god help you a ranger...they don't seem that bad at all.


----------



## MrMyth (May 27, 2010)

korjik said:


> You seem to miss that _controllers_ dont get multiattacks that are that good. Generally, multiple target attacks are around half damage compared to the single target attacks. This is pretty standard across all classes in the PHB1 and PHB2, but the monk is exempted.




Taking a quick look, I'm pretty certain this isn't true. Let's compare the Monk to the Wizard from levels 1 through 10. I am consistently seeing the Wizard having higher base damage and significantly more targets. Now, this doesn't count Flurry of Blows, which is a big damage boost - just like a Striker deserves. And the Monk does have one genuine advantage - they can't hit their allies. But in terms of how many people they can attack and the base damage of those attacks? The Wizard is easily ahead. 

Level 1: The Monk gets a higher damage burst 1 At-Will, with Five Storms. The Wizard gets the highest damage Daily Burst 2 (Freezing Cloud, which attacks twice, outdamages Masterful Spiral), but Spinning Leopard can potentially yield more attacks in the right circumstances. Monk has no relevant multi-target encounter powers, compared to the Wizard's Blast 5 Burning Hands or Skewering Spikes (any three targets within 5 squares.) 

Level 3: The Monk gets Eternal Mountain, a Burst 1 that knocks prone. The Wizard gets Fire Shroud, a Burst 3 for more damage (due to ongoing damage) or the lower damage Blast 5 Color Spray that _dazes_. 

Level 5: The Monk gets One Hundred Leaves, a Blast 3 that pushes. It runs fleeing in terror from Grasp of the Grave, which is larger (a Burst 2) that dazes on a hit, does full damage on a miss, and sticks around doing automatic damage each turn. For sheer number of targets, Fireball brings a Burst 3, and for sheer damage output, Stinking Cloud is a Burst 2 which inflicts full-power automatic damage each round. 

Level 7: The Monk has Fist of One Hundred Strikes, which can hit 2 enemies within reach for not much damage. The Wizard gets a Burst 3 Repelling sphere for less damage, or can be satisfied with a Burst 2 power for higher damage and automatic damage the following round (either via Corrosive Mist or Winter's Wrath). 

Level 9 Daily: The Monk gets Crane Dance, another decent one, which gives multiple attacks that knock prone with the ability to shift in between each of them. Of course, Wall of Fire can hit largely the same spread of enemies for automatic damage, or one can simply unleash Ice Storm for equal damage and _immobilized_ instead of prone. 

The only powers that can really compare are Spinning Leopard and Crane Dance, and even they are up against tough competition. In general, though, the Wizard has the edge in damage and targets and conditions. More than that - the Monk doesn't really have _reliable_ multi-target attacks. Only its dailies let it truly hit a decent number of enemies - otherwise, it is pretty much limited to Close Burst 1s. The Monk comes out on par with the Swordmage, basically - a similar sub-controller with reliable access to smaller-scale multitargeting. 

And the damage... 3d8, 2d8, 2d6. I have no idea why you consider those staggering amounts of damage compared to others. It isn't terrible, but isn't anything amazing in terms of raw dice. It can't compare to wizard attacks that hit multiple times or deal automatic damage. Now, Flurry of Blows adds a pretty big kick - but it is supposed to, to let the Monk fulfill its striker role. They can certainly contribute against multiple foes, but they certainly aren't making controller attacks obselete.

I'm just not sure where you got the idea that controller attacks aren't that good. Keep in mind, other classes tend to have specific features that enhance what they do - marks, striker damage, healing words. Controllers are very much tied to their powers, and it typically shows - those powers are often exceptional, and let them perform quite well whenever they can bring their multitargeting powers into play.


----------



## Njall (May 28, 2010)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> I don't think monks are overpowered in general, but I do think there's something fishy about their AC. I mean, they get a +2 class bonus and they have access to a no-brainer +2 feat bonus. Why do monks need to have defender grade AC, exactly? (Same goes for avengers, while we're at it.)




Assuming the monk spent a feat on Unarmored Agility, his AC is 1 point ahead of a rogue that took WP (parrying dagger) or Hide Armor Proficiency. 
The rogue is 1 point ahead in accuracy, though. 
In addition, as long as the rogue can bump his Con score to 15, he's going to catch up in paragon ( thanks to hide armor specialization ). 
Monks' AC is fine, or at least it's not noticeably better than what any striker/controller with dex (or potentially int) as his primary stat and a bit of investment can achieve.
Avenger and Barbarians are the guys with dangerously high AC...
The problem is that until all defenders get a class bonus to AC, "defender level AC" can be achieved in a number of ways and by a ton of classes.


----------



## Argyle King (May 28, 2010)

It may be worth pointing out that a Monk benefits greatly from having a Superior Implement; in particular, an accurate implement can be a good investment for a monk.


----------



## Tarrl (May 29, 2010)

Johnny3D3D said:


> It may be worth pointing out that a Monk benefits greatly from having a Superior Implement; in particular, an accurate implement can be a good investment for a monk.



Could you explain how that works Johnyy3d3d? I was curious about that option myself.
thanks


----------



## Argyle King (May 29, 2010)

Tarrl said:


> Could you explain how that works Johnyy3d3d? I was curious about that option myself.
> thanks




I'm away from my books right now because I'm away from home, but I'll try to answer as best as I can from memory.

To gain access to Superior Implements, you need to take the Superior Implement feat.  Through this feat, it's possible to use Accurate Implements which give a +1 to attacks made with that implement.  The majority of monk powers have the implement keyword, so (I think) you could gain a +1 to attack rolls to pretty much all of your powers by using an accurate implement.

You can then still take versatile expertise on top of using an accurate implement for even more of a bonus to your attack rolls.


Can somebody else weigh in here and add anything I may have missed?


----------



## Prestidigitalis (May 29, 2010)

Johnny3D3D said:


> It may be worth pointing out that a Monk benefits greatly from having a Superior Implement; in particular, an accurate implement can be a good investment for a monk.




Where are superior implements for monks described?  I don't see them in PHB3.


----------



## abyssaldeath (May 29, 2010)

Prestidigitalis said:


> Where are superior implements for monks described?  I don't see them in PHB3.




Superior Staffs?


----------



## Peraion Graufalke (May 29, 2010)

Prestidigitalis said:


> Where are superior implements for monks described?  I don't see them in PHB3.




PH3, page 195. Monks can use daggers and staffs as superior implements, although the daggers aren't in PH3 for some reason (they're in the Character Builder).

EDIT: The daggers are from Dragon #385.


----------



## ArmoredSaint (May 29, 2010)

One of my primary problems with the monk is that his attacks don't target Armour Class.  How in the heck does that make sense?  At least some of his attacks are described as punches/kicks, right?  Why shouldn't they target AC?  They did the same with the Druid in animal-shape; his attacks target NADs, even though those of the equivalent animal in the monster manual usually target AC.  I don't understand why something that is very plainly a physical attack should ever get to ignore armour.  There's too much of that going on in this game for my taste...

In addition, as another poster mentioned earlier, there is indeed something fishy going on with the ACs of certain light-armoured classes.  Why do they have so many options (class features, feats, powers) to boost their AC?  I thought the Striker role was _supposed_ to be something of a glass cannon?  It's just thematically _wrong_ for them to be running around sporting ACs better than those of men in plate or scale (or even chain!).  When are the heavy armour classes going to get some love?


----------



## Mort_Q (May 29, 2010)

ArmoredSaint said:


> One of my primary problems with the monk is that his attacks don't target Armour Class.  How in the heck does that make sense?  At least some of his attacks are described as punches/kicks, right?  Why shouldn't they target AC?  They did the same with the Druid in animal-shape; his attacks target NADs, even though those of the equivalent animal in the monster manual usually target AC.  I don't understand why something that is very plainly a physical attack should ever get to ignore armour.  There's too much of that going on in this game for my taste...




It's simply a matter of balance.  As non-weapon attacks, this balances out the lack of weapon proficiencies.


----------



## Prestidigitalis (May 29, 2010)

Peraion Graufalke said:


> PH3, page 195. Monks can use daggers and staffs as superior implements, although the daggers aren't in PH3 for some reason (they're in the Character Builder).




I guess I was thinking of Ki Focuses specifically.  How about them?


----------



## Peraion Graufalke (May 29, 2010)

Prestidigitalis said:


> I guess I was thinking of Ki Focuses specifically.  How about them?




Well, you can't boost them with a feat like you can do with implements and Superior Implement Proficiency. I'm not sure if that answers your question, though.


----------



## Argyle King (May 30, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> It's simply a matter of balance. As non-weapon attacks, this balances out the lack of weapon proficiencies.





This is completely true, but it also illustrates the 'problem' with accurate implements.  With an accurate implement, it's possible for me to have the same attack bonus with an implement as I do with a weapon while also targeting defenses which are usually far lower than AC - the defense normally targeted by weapon attacks.


I say 'problem' because many people view this as being a non-issue.  However, I feel that it tends to throw off the expected math which the game is built upon.  I still do not feel the monk is overpowered; however, I can understand why someone might feel the monk feels overpowered.  Also, accurate implements are one of the things presented in PHB3 which I feel are guilty of power creep.  The difference between building a character with PHB1 or PHB2 vs PHB3 is a bit more pronounced than it is between PHB1 and PHB2.  I'm starting to drift off topic though.


I do not feel the monk is overpowered, but I do feel it is possible to build a monk which can simultaneously perform the striker, controller, and defender roles.  Unlike other classes which can perform multiple roles, the monk can do all three rather well without sacrificing very much effectiveness.  This can cause the monk to appear overpowered when compared to other classes, but I feel it's more an issue of later parts of 4E seeming to built upon different design goals and game assumptions than what earlier 4E parts were built with.


----------



## Mort_Q (May 30, 2010)

Isn't an accurate implement only an additional +1?


----------



## Argyle King (May 30, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> Isn't an accurate implement only an additional +1?




Yes, and Versatile Expertise is another +1 for a total of +2 which puts you on par with the proficiency bonus granted by some weapons.  You're targeting defenses which are typically a few points lower than AC - the defense typically targeted by weapons which means you're actually more accurate than a weapon user in many cases.  Since virtually all of a monk's powers are implement attacks, it's a good investment for a monk.


----------



## Mort_Q (May 30, 2010)

I haven't done the math, but don't weapon users also have access to expertise feats?  Aren't weapon users ahead of the curve on damage output since they can use better weapons?  Doesn't it work out then that Monks hit more often but do less damage?


----------



## keterys (May 31, 2010)

They can both get Expertise, so that's nothing new. Accurate Implement brings you back on par with a weapon attack in most respects, at the cost of a feat. 

Part of me suspects that monks using superior implement: staff, when they use ki focus as their actual implement type, is an oversight.


----------



## Victim (May 31, 2010)

keterys said:


> They can both get Expertise, so that's nothing new. Accurate Implement brings you back on par with a weapon attack in most respects, at the cost of a feat.




There are plenty of weapon attacks that attack NADs instead of AC though.


----------



## Mort_Q (May 31, 2010)

Victim said:


> There are plenty of weapon attacks that attack NADs instead of AC though.




No _at-will_ attacks, iirc.


----------



## abyssaldeath (May 31, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> No _at-will_ attacks, iirc.




The Rogue has one. It's even in the PHB1. Piercing Strike.


----------



## Mort_Q (May 31, 2010)

abyssaldeath said:


> The Rogue has one. It's even in the PHB1. Piercing Strike.




Right.  Light blade only though... so low damage.  It's all fairly well balanced.  Mostly.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (May 31, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> Right.  Light blade only though... so low damage.  It's all fairly well balanced.  Mostly.




The weapon damage doesn't matter as much as one might think, especially when you can add in sneak attack damage almost every hit.

Hell, I came within an inch of taking Power Attack, as I was often hitting on a 3 or better with my rogue with Piercing Strike.

Brad


----------



## Budalic (May 31, 2010)

*Accurate* superior implement is actually balanced. Other are underpowered.

Think about it: 

Superior implement should be a comparable option to Superior weapon proficiency.

Superior weapon proficiency nets you either +1 average damage per die (Bastard sword, Craighammer) or +1 attack (Triple-headed flail) with *all* your powers.

Accurate implement nets you +1 attack with *all* your powers.

But, say, *Ashen rod* offers +1 attack vs. reflex and +2/3/4 damage per tier with fire powers. It limits your power selection *drastically* for a paltry + 2/3/4 bonus to damage.

Make no mistake, implement users are still underpowered in damage department. Monk's damage won't come even close to a well-built ranger with Called Shot/Prime Quarry bonuses or Rogue with enormous crits and +2/3/5d6 dice of sneak attack. Charging barbarian with vanguard weapon and horned helm still deals +1/2/3d6 +2d8 damage with charge attack, ...

That being said, Monk has some cool options (Starblade flurry, Staff combo, ...)


----------



## mneme (May 31, 2010)

2/3/4 is hardly paltry.  It's a striker feature-level boost.  Adding those up is how you get to the big numbers.

Sure, 9W attacks let a Barbarian hit the big numbers with a big weapon.  But implements are -supposed- to be slightly different from weapons--more element-centered and effect based rather than straight damage based (which might explain things like Forceful, which is kinda awesome for a superior implement property for the right character).

Don't forget Empowered Crit and Deadly, too, if you're looking for damage without having to restrict your powers.

But yes.  Weapon users get Superior Weapon Prof -- which usually gets them +1 per die and a property or +1 to hit.  So Superior Implement Prof covers the gap from the other end, letting Implement users get +1 to hit or a damage bonus (better than +1 per die on at wills, worse on encounter/daily powers) plus some special like Forceful, +1 to hit on a defense, or Empowered Crit.  It's a fine way to balance things better (and I suspect there'll be Superior Ki Foci in Psionic Power).


----------



## Budalic (May 31, 2010)

mneme said:


> 2/3/4 is hardly paltry.  It's a striker feature-level boost.  Adding those up is how you get to the big numbers.




It is a boost comparable to *single feat *(Githzerai blade master) which adds bonus to *all* your powers. And Weapon focus (staff), which works with implement attacks is better, since it also applies to all your powers.
+2/3/4 is paltry when you can choose power that's better by large margin (say, fireball vs. stinking cloud).

But, you are right. The real paltry thing here is gaining +1 to hit vs. *single* defense. Only crystal orb is worth it, really.



mneme said:


> But yes.  Weapon users get Superior Weapon Prof -- which usually gets them +1 per die and a property or +1 to hit.  So Superior Implement Prof covers the gap from the other end, letting Implement users get +1 to hit or a damage bonus (better than +1 per die on at wills, worse on encounter/daily powers) plus some special like Forceful, +1 to hit on a defense, or Empowered Crit.  It's a fine way to balance things better (and I suspect there'll be Superior Ki Foci in Psionic Power).




+1 to hit is strictly better on an at-will if you deal more than 20 damage at heroic, 30 at paragon and 40 at epic. And that should be minimum for stirkers, especially if they are multi-target like monk.

EDIT: Ooops, I misunderstood you. I tought you are comparing +1 to hit vs. +2/3/4 damage. The superior weapon prof. thing is really a +2 vs. +3 prof. weapon comparision; and for some classes (or better - roles: leader and controller) +1 to hit is always better. Lead the attack may deal 3[W]+Str damage, but you really want it to hit more than you want +3 damage.

As for implements, Empowered crit really adds just about 0.5 damage per attack, and Shielding is keyed to hitting. It's best of the rest compared to Accurate, but still shielding + anything else < Accurate. Forceful and Distant are just minor benefits, and they are worst of the bunch. Crystal Orb gives +1 vs. will and +2/3/4 psychinc damage, and is best for illusionst wizards and telepathic psions, which are pretty effective. It's only thing usefull besides Accurate staff/wand/orb/...


----------



## Droogie128 (May 31, 2010)

Mort_Q said:


> Right.  Light blade only though... so low damage.  It's all fairly well balanced.  Mostly.




Weapon damage isn't a huge factor for rogues. Daggers are only d4 and are basically the best weapons a rogue can wield because of the +1 to hit and the Daggermaster Paragon Path. Hitting is the most important thing, making sure you get sneak attack and applying all those nice rider effects on your powers.

Not to derail any further, monks are anything but overpowered. I do love their mobility though, and their ability to really spread around the damage.


----------



## keterys (May 31, 2010)

The +2/3/4 damage obtained from the other implement types stacks with feat bonuses, which means you can't really compare to Weapon Focus or Goliath Greatweapon Training. Also, very few superior weapons actually give a +1 attack as their benefit - just Flails and Greatspear - and they never go above the baseline presented (you can get +3 without superior, you can't get +4 with it). So, claiming that Accurate is balanced for a feat slot and the others are underpowered is not a logically analyzed statement. It is a perfectly valid opinion that implement users deserved it though - a lot of people felt that implement users were underpowered.

I am a little sad that the generic gimme approach is once again the best option, and wish the more flavorful options were not mechanically worse. Oh well.


----------



## Budalic (May 31, 2010)

keterys said:


> I am a little sad that the generic gimme approach is once again the best option, and wish the more flavorful options were not mechanically worse. Oh well.




I agree. Mechanical bonuses have proven to be the best in 4e - Iron Armbands of Power, Radiant Weapon, Staff of Ruin, Weapon focus, Expertise (a math fix, but it's still the best feat in game) ... It is sad, really.

As an aside, given that Implement users have Superior option now, should't there be an Implement focus feat? Dual Implement spellcaster isn't exactly accesible to everyone.

Sorry for overuse of bold. Just wanted to add some emphasis on certain points.


----------



## Droogie128 (May 31, 2010)

Budalic said:


> I agree. Mechanical bonuses have proven to be the best in 4e - Iron Armbands of Power, Radiant Weapon, Staff of Ruin, Weapon focus, Expertise (a math fix, but it's still the best feat in game) ... It is sad, really.
> 
> As an aside, given that Implement users have Superior option now, should't there be an Implement focus feat? Dual Implement spellcaster isn't exactly accesible to everyone.
> 
> Sorry for overuse of bold. Just wanted to add some emphasis on certain points.




Implement users benefit from weapon focus, so that wouldn't be necessary.


----------



## Budalic (May 31, 2010)

Droogie128 said:


> Implement users benefit from weapon focus, so that wouldn't be necessary.




Well, you can't take, say, Weapon focus (orb).


----------



## Black Knight Irios (May 31, 2010)

Budalic said:


> Well, you can't take, say, Weapon focus (orb).




Not all implements can benefit from Weapon Focus but some can and the "some" are all those that are weapons as well.


----------



## Budalic (May 31, 2010)

Black Knight Irios said:


> Not all implements can benefit from Weapon Focus but some can and the "some" are all those that are weapons as well.




Not my point. The fact that some implements are also a weapons makes them superior for damage oriented and/or keyword changing purposes. Staff is eaons better than any of wizard implements for damage, because it is also a weapon, and thus can benefit from Weapon focus. Implement focus feat would level the playing field, making, say, elemental resistance breaching tomes, some orbs, and at-will enhancing wands also good.

If you are, say, a warlock, you have to pick either Arcane Implement Proficiency (a weapon, staff is the best because of Staff of Ruin) and Weapon focus with that weapon or take Pact enhanced weapon and Weapon focus. Rods, built specifically for warlocks, are left dry. Luckly, Dual implement spellcaster helps in this case.

Staff is the worst offender. It is both an implement, making it a Superior implement option; it is a weapon, so Weapon focus and Flaming/Frost/Lighting options apply; and it has Staff of ruin as an enchantment. 

And dont get me started on Syberis shard of Mage...


----------



## Zaran (Jun 1, 2010)

Guys, no offense but you are getting off the topic. We were discussing whether monks are overpowered when compared to other strikers. Let's leave the superior implement discussion for another thread. I don't think feats and abilites that feats grant should be too much of a factor since pretty much every class has feats that it can benefit from.

I love monks, but Korjik and I have been comparing the class to other strikers and on paper the monk seems overpowered. We've had few posts on how monks have compared to other strikers. So far, I've learned that Rogues are much more accurate than monks. 

Let's look at Sly Flourish vs Crane's Wings at Level 1 using the standard array attributes both with combat advantage.

With a Dagger, a Brutal Scoundrel rogue would have a to-hit of +10 (+4 Dex +3 Prof +1 Class +2 CA) vs AC and do 1d4+2d6 +9 (+4 Dex +3 Cha +2 Str)

About 18.5 pts of damage

A Stone Fist monk in the same situation would have a to-hit of +6 (+4 Dex +2 CA) vs Fort and would do to 1d10+10 (+4 Dex +3 Str+3 Stone first) to the same target.

That's about 15.5 damage. 

To me, the Rogue beats the monk hands down in both accuracy and damage at least in At-Wills damage. I belive that if the monk is overpowered it would be in the extras like being able move around more or in the high damage Encounter and Dailies.

I personally do not think that the movement extras are overpowered. Sticking with the rogue as comparison, they can get at-wills that let them have a free shift or couple squares of extra Move that is comparable to the move actions Monks get as part of their At-wills.


----------



## Budalic (Jun 1, 2010)

You have to keep in mind that rogue excels with single target powers, while monk is more of a multi-target striker. Comparision with sorcerer is probably better. But, if you are comparing rogue and monk, rogue starts better (like you pointed out) and the gap between them keeps expanding because rogue is better supported by far. Rogue has PHB, Martial power, MP2, and some DDI material, while monk has just the PHB 3. 
Brutal scoundrel rogue with 18 dex and 16 str will have an attack of +8 vs. reflex, 1d4 + 2d6 + 7 damage, while stone fist monk with same stats has +4 vs. fort (usually weaker defense), 1d10 + 10 damage. 
Mobility is nice, but rogue with Deft strike has nice ranged option, too.


----------



## Tarrl (Jun 3, 2010)

I will be playing a 7th level half Orc stonefist Monk in the next few weeks. Any magic item or feats I should take?


----------



## Budalic (Jun 3, 2010)

Tarrl said:


> I will be playing a 7th level half Orc stonefist Monk in the next few weeks. Any magic item or feats I should take?




I recommend Hafted defense + Weapon focus (staff) + Staff of Ruin

And Unarmored Agility is the best feat Monk can take.

EDIT: I forgot Superior Implement Proficiency (Accurate Staff)


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 3, 2010)

Budalic said:


> I recommend Hafted defense + Weapon focus (staff) + Staff of Ruin
> 
> And Unarmored Agility is the best feat Monk can take.
> 
> EDIT: I forgot Superior Implement Proficiency (Accurate Staff)



Why a Staff of Ruin +2?  Staff of the Serpent +2 is probably better.  (+d6 poison damage to all your melee powers).


----------



## Budalic (Jun 3, 2010)

Neonchameleon said:


> Why a Staff of Ruin +2?  Staff of the Serpent +2 is probably better.  (+d6 poison damage to all your melee powers).




It doesn't work with close burst/blast powers, like Five Storms. And IMO, Five Storms is the best Monk at-will.

But yeah, if you don't have a lot of close powers, Staff of Serpent is better until late paragon (keep in mind that poison is the most commonly resisted element, though)


----------



## mysticknight232 (Jun 3, 2010)

Tarrl said:


> I will be playing a 7th level half Orc stonefist Monk in the next few weeks. Any magic item or feats I should take?




I'm playing a Centered Breath Monk currently lvl 2 in a LFR campaign.  I chose Versitile Expertise (Ki Focus and Spear) at lvl 1 and Pointed Step Style at lvl 2.  I feel that the dmg output is nearly identical with the Centered Breath compared to the Stone Fist and I liked the reach that Pointed Step Style provided me when wielding a Spear, especially with the Slide ability of the power.  While I do like using a staff and taking Hafted Defense, my plan is to select Unarmored Agility at lvl 4 then go the Two Weapon Fighting/Defense route for lvls 6/8 while duel wielding a Spear and a Dagger.  For lvl 10 I will either choose Defensive Mobility because I move around a lot as a Monk or Melee Training: Agility for OAs.  I'm lucky and picked up a Magic Spear +2 when I hit lvl 2 right away so my MBA isn't as bad as it should be, but I still feel like Melee Training will come in handy.  

Anyway, that's my two cents worth.  It can be applied in similar fashion to your Stone Fist Monk build, just substitute Spear with a Club and take the Club feat to increase your FoB dmg by +2 if you liked what you read here.


----------



## Budalic (Jun 3, 2010)

mysticknight232 said:


> I'm lucky and picked up a Magic Spear +2 when I hit lvl 2 right away so my MBA isn't as bad as it should be, but I still feel like Melee Training will come in handy.




I don't think Stone Fist monk can justify +1 to MBA for a feat (Melee Training: Dexterity)



mysticknight232 said:


> Anyway, that's my two cents worth.  It can be applied in similar fashion to your Stone Fist Monk build, just substitute Spear with a Club and take the Club feat to increase your FoB dmg by +2 if you liked what you read here.




Said Club feat is called Crashing Tempest Style. You can also take a Belt of the Brawler to use your unarmed attack as a Club. This route is pretty good if you want to take Starblade Flurry in paragon.


----------



## mysticknight232 (Jun 3, 2010)

Budalic said:


> I don't think Stone Fist monk can justify +1 to MBA for a feat (Melee Training: Dexterity)




True that!  I expect it to be useful to me given my +0 modifier to Str, but not helpful to a Stone Fist Monk.  Thanks for pointing that out as I forgot to mention that would need to be changed as well.


----------



## Tarrl (Jun 4, 2010)

Very informative! thank you!


----------

