Monk Damage?

[Gazzien]

So... we can hit 20th-level monk damage at level 7, I think?
Level 7 Monk
Gauntlet of the Talon (Complete Divine, p97) relic, with True Believer Feat (+5 levels, B or S damage, ghost touch, explicitly stacks with...)
Monk's Belt (+5 levels)
Superior Unarmed Strike (+4 Levels)

so... Level 21 Monk damage at level 7, for the cost of two magic items and two feats (SUS + True Believer (Bahamut))... too bad the progression doesn't go epic. I suppose you could grab Beast Strike for +1d8 (as Gauntlet of the Talon gives you 1d8 claws), or Improved Natural Attack for a few extra d8's...

Am I missing something? Or did they just put in items to make monks... almost keep up, maybe, to a vanilla fighter, for a level or two?

[SorO_Lost]

Monks outpace Fighters by the 7th level.

But yes, Unarmed Strike with little effort rolls more dice than a Wizard's Fireball. It's one of the reasons their mid-game is significantly higher than the real mundanes.

[Demelain]

It's also a pretty good reason to not take more than a few Monk levels (if any). Their best class features are replaced and advanced by items/feats.

[Sjappo]

Monks outpace Fighters by the 7th level.

But yes, Unarmed Strike with little effort rolls more dice than a Wizard's Fireball. It's one of the reasons their mid-game is significantly higher than the real mundanes.

I'm so used to monk bashing that I'm a bit surprised to see veteran members endorse the monk. I've seen Soro speak up twice now. What changed this? Why is 2d10 base damage enough to overcome medium bab, MAD, medium HP and non synergizing class features?

[Demelain]

I don't think I'd call it endorsement of actually taking monk. When the topic is "melee damage," the monk is relevant and not bad at all. It's easy to max out the unarmed progression early using items, then using size-increases it can be bumped up further to, for example, 12d8 (colossal). I'm told there are progressions for "colossal+" but do not know where to go for them.
It doesn't change that the class is poor overall, or that past 6 it becomes particularly bad. But it (unarmed strike) IS an easily optimized weapon.

[Sinfire Titan]

Monks outpace Fighters by the 7th level.

But yes, Unarmed Strike with little effort rolls more dice than a Wizard's Fireball. It's one of the reasons their mid-game is significantly higher than the real mundanes.

I'm so used to monk bashing that I'm a bit surprised to see veteran members endorse the monk. I've seen Soro speak up twice now. What changed this? Why is 2d10 base damage enough to overcome medium bab, MAD, medium HP and non synergizing class features?

2d10 isn't the Monk's base damage. 28d6 is, and that's actually useful. Most people who optimize the Monk's damage still multiclass out around 4th or 6th level (depending on the build and how much BAB they need), and in the case of Tashalatora Monks they only have 1 or 2 levels at most. The latter makes optimizing unarmed damage trivial with Expansion (and UMDing a wand of Greater Mighty Wallop).

And that's the secret to making the Monk's unarmed damage progression good: Viagra.

[SorO_Lost]

I'm so used to monk bashing that I'm a bit surprised to see veteran members endorse the monk. I've seen Soro speak up twice now. What changed this? Why is 2d10 base damage enough to overcome medium bab, MAD, medium HP and non synergizing class features?

Actually I've spoke up on it a number of times. Mostly in Monk vs threads.

Monk 2 mechanically advertises it's self as a really useful Class dip so I've always sided with that, plus I've cited for years Unarmed is the best weapon in D&D, part of which is owed to how the Monk handles it. If there was a turning point, it'd be Shadow Blend which got my attention that Monk doesn't end at the 2nd level.

When you get into generic vague numbers Monk holds up ok at low levels. Like at level 2 the Monk is behind a point in BAB and is using a 1d6 Quarterstaff rather than the 2d6 Greatsword. It's a -1/-3.5 loss, but Invisible Fist awards +2 to Attack and it's vs Flat-Footed, plus FoB's 2nd attack. During the Monk's peak he surpasses the other mundanes by as early as the 2nd level. By 6th level the Monk generally out damages the Barbarian, this is due to the fact without Flaws Classes like the Monk and Fighter augment their Shock Trooper numbers with multipliers like Battle Jump and Leap Attack that unlike Frenzy are sustained throughout the day. Later on? Unarmed does a wtflolzpwnt to the game creating a zero comparison with offense.

Defense favors the Monk later on. For two and a half reasons actually. The first is that while early on equipment provides a huge boost in AC, later on your AC is primarily composed of magical effects. Magical effects the Monk can obtain. Secondly, armor is static, a +8 bonus from Full Plate is +8 at level 1 and level 20 (recall the +5 enhance can be applied to anything). Monk on the other hand has his uncapped Dexterity Modifier, plus his Wisdom Modifier, plus an additional +5. The second reasons is AC is worthless against Spells and SLAs that higher Cr monsters almost always have so the effectiveness of AC detracts as the game goes on. Enter Shadow Blend. Unless bypassed with an effect like Blindsight Total-Concealment negates AoOs being taken against you and no Spellcaster can target you with a Spell. And without effects like Mindsight, Blindsense, or Scent a 5ft Step after attacking creates more possible points to attack than Mirror Image does. And technically, the 7th level isn't the last improvement the Monk obtains. Blink at the 9th level is. A 9th level Monk has a chance, no matter how small it's a chance, to ignore game ending spells like Blasphemy. The Monk is playing in a caster's realm of defense.

The 3rd part is utility. None of the "mundanes" stand out here honestly. But you'd be surprised at how useful Invisibility/Total-Concealment can turn anyone into a scout/thief.

[nijineko]

depending on the options, and if one allows the weapon size damage chart to either extend or to uses epic progression, a monk's unarmed damage will easily hit 80d8 - 100+d8 before 20th level.

[Gazzien]

There isn't an epic progression for damage, though.... Unless it's not on the SRD? SRD epic monk says damage doesn't increase after 20...

[linklord231]

There isn't an epic progression for damage, though.... Unless it's not on the SRD? SRD epic monk says damage doesn't increase after 20...

You're not progressing the Monk UAS damage values past 20, you're getting them to 20 and then using size increases to hit as if you're a Colossal (or bigger) 20th level monk.  The table for that is on DMG pg 28.

[Sjappo]

depending on the options, and if one allows the weapon size damage chart to either extend or to uses epic progression, a monk's unarmed damage will easily hit 80d8 - 100+d8 before 20th level.

The damage progression tables are a bit speculative as far as I know. And others can play the colossal++ game as well. They lag behind due to the lower starting damage. BTW how do you get from 2d10 base damage to 12d8 colossol damage to 26d6 as base damage. Not seeing it.

So monk should be tier 4 then? If it can outdamage a Barbarian an is more versatile than other mundanes it should be at least T4, right?

Now I go and Google all those feats and whatnot I'm not familiar with.

Edit: started out as a reply to nijineko and ended up as a general reply to thing read in the tread. Nijineko, my comments are not directed at you per se.

[Sinfire Titan]

depending on the options, and if one allows the weapon size damage chart to either extend or to uses epic progression, a monk's unarmed damage will easily hit 80d8 - 100+d8 before 20th level.

The damage progression tables are a bit speculative as far as I know. And others can play the colossal++ game as well. They lag behind due to the lower starting damage. BTW how do you get from 2d10 base damage to 12d8 colossol damage to 26d6 as base damage. Not seeing it.

So monk should be tier 4 then? If it can outdamage a Barbarian an is more versatile than other mundanes it should be at least T4, right?

Now I go and Google all those feats and whatnot I'm not familiar with.

Edit: started out as a reply to nijineko and ended up as a general reply to thing read in the tread. Nijineko, my comments are not directed at you per se.

Tier-wise, no. It takes quite a bit of optimization to get to the higher damage values, and these things are not something a beginner would pick up on until it gets pointed out. Typically. Assuming all optimization is equal (be it high or low), the Barbarian is going to beat the Monk at most things combat-related.

[SorO_Lost]

Tier wise is a whole other discussion. I believe it's understood I think little of JaronK and find his list insulting.

To ramble a few example oddities, Monk doesn't appear on it, the Barbarian who struggles to keep up with other mundanes damage wise and doesn't have any other f*cking trick is listed as being as versatile as a Rogue. Dungeoncrasher Fighter at some point was listed higher than a Shock Trooper Fighter despite dealing less. Why does the CW Samurai with Impervious Command deserve special notation as being comparable to any, that means including Sword of the Arcane Order, Paladin? Why is the motherfracking Expert even sharing the same space as a 9th level spellcasting Class? And so on. Why is there even a separate listing for ACFs or "with this Feat it can do X!"?

I mean let's *really* get into this for a split second. Tiers is primarily defined as versatile, higher you are more options you have. Except, when you as JK his thoughts on Barbarian his reply is the Barbarian is good at his job. He has one role and he does it well. What kind of f*cking excuse is that? The Healer has one job, heal people, and it f*cking does that in spades. Not to mention the Healer has social capabilities and can solo Traps all day long, did you know when one Feat it obtains the ability to Cast Shapechange? How versatile is that? Answer? Less than a Samurai.

You need to understand this. JK did not write Tiers as a guide. He isn't trying to enlighten you. He isn't trying to improve D&D. He wrote Tiers as a rebuttal. Rogue is Tier 3 because as *I* defined Tiers it is Tier 3. Not enough for you? That's fine, 339, GitP, ENWorld and BG didn't like that answer either. Hence six months later and JK posts rebuttal #2, when he did Tiers he set up four Encounter styles and ran each Class through it (despite not knowing half the classes in D&D). Recent GitP thread in the spring or so has JK admitting he doesn't even know what the encounters are. Funny, I still got notes from a game ten years ago, you'd think something I spent so much effort weighing and evaluating crunched numbers in would be laying around. Anyway, this second rebuttal was a shitty as the first. One example does stand out. How does your Class help a town defend against an Orc horde? If your JK, your Rogue assassinates their king. This A) Does nothing to help the town prepare for the Orcs. B) Does nothing to the infrastructure if your read Orc lore. C) It is fundamentally the Rogue attempting to solo the entire Encounter. Which is exactly how 90% of the other Classes would do it. This measurement test fundamentally keys off who has Craft & Diplomacy as Class Skills and whom can cheat things by summoning a new stone wall around the place that smashes people. The Barbarian doesn't rack up extra points because it has the lowest kill count among mundanes, unless you're J/K.

And this isn't the first time stuff like this as flown around. BG has threads on this, I've already pointed out and had people agree with me on the Barbarian before. I've seen others agree on Fighter, Healer, etc. Over on BG Plz even created an updated tier listing that while massively flawed, does list several left out Classes and hold on to your seat here: Plz took opinions on the forum into consideration when building his list. amazing huh? Anyway. We've had partial updates, we have had alternatives. We have had better versions of Tier listings that isn't done by a guy sucking his own cock. Hell, I even made my own list, guess what's it's based off of. Spellcasting. Love to see you argue how that isn't relevant or accurate.

So why don't they persist? Well, MMX has a whole has no need for them. No one cared to move them over, because no one at MMX uses them. It's a crash course introduction for people at GitP. The only Tier thread to get moved here was JK's thread. By JK him self. And that was renamed from "Tiers for D&D" to "JaronK's Tier list". And it's the original post that refuses to acknowledge updates, corrections, additional insight, or any community based contribution. Because it's not a guide, it's a rebuttal. JK is arguing X is Y, because he defined Z.

And you people fucking stickied him trolling you.
Great job.

[Sjappo]

@Soro. WOW. Didn't meen to send you off man. As flawed as these comparissons invariably are they give people like me a baseline to work from. Let me explain. Caveat. English is a second langauge for me. I'm struggling to find the right words. So please bear with me.

I've been away from the hobby since the advent of 3.0. I started up a few years ago. In that time I've build 2 PC's I've played and a few handful of NPC's and monsters with classlevels for an one-shot I DMed. I am in no way an expert on optimization. But lists like the tier system give me a baseline. It helps me to take the first step in understanding why the weapon finess DEX based monk in our group was struggling to do damage. And why his STR based unarmed swordsage is doing so much better. And why basically just fucking around with a Cloistered Cleric dabbling in Crusader is not a problem. My PC is still viable.

I can see the list is not for you. Or other experienced players. You've got your own insight and your own list. Fair enough. Maybe your list is better. But this list is good enough for me. As soon as I can intelligently discuss with you the merits of a STP erudite vs. an artificer I will have my own list as well.

[FlaminCows]

Interesting. SorO, could you link to these other tier lists? It would be interesting to see the differences, and perhaps use as a reference later.

[SorO_Lost]

Interesting. SorO, could you link to these other tier lists? It would be interesting to see the differences, and perhaps use as a reference later.

#1: Plz's list: brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11714

(click to show/hide)

Tier Outline
6(3+3NPC): Aristocrat, Commoner, Divine Mind (CP 9), Warrior, Samurai (CW 6), Truenamer (TM 198)

5(14+2NPC): Battledancer (DC 26), Divine Mind (with Web Enhancements), Eidolon (Gh 16), Expert, Fighter, Healer (MH 8), Knight, Lurk (CP 13), Magewright (ECS 256), Mariner (LotT 13), Mlar (Dungeon Magazine 100 256-257 githyanki section), Monk, Ninja (CAd 5), Noble (DCS 50), Paladin, Samurai (with Imperious Command feat), Soulborn (MoI 25), Soulknife, Swashbuckler (CW 11)

4(18+1NPC): Adept, Barbarian, Dragonfire Adept (with Breath Effects), Dragon Shaman (PHB2 11), Fighter (Dungeon Crasher variant), Jester (DC 36), Hexblade (CW 5), Marshal, Master (WotL 21), Montebank (DC 42), Nightstalker (Races of Ansalon 156), Ranger, Rogue, Savant (DC 45), Scout (CAd 10), Spellthief, Sohei (OA 27), Totemist, Warlock (CArc 5), Warmage (CArc 10)

3(16): Ardent (CP 5), Bard, Beguiler (PHB2 6), Binder (TM 9), Crusader (ToB 8), Dread Necromancer (HH 84), Duskblade (PHB2 19), Factotum (Du 14), Incarnate (MoI 20), Psychic Rogue (with powers), Psychic Warrior, Ranger (Wildshape variant), Shadowcaster (TM 111), Shugenja (CD 10), Swordsage (ToB 15), Warblade, Wilder,

2(9): Binder (with Online Vestiges), Death Master (DC 31), Favored Soul (CD 6), Mystic (DCS 47), Psion, Sha'ir (DC 51), Shaman (OA 23), Sorcerer, Spirit Shaman (CD 14), Wu Jen (CArc 14)

1(6): Archivist, Artificer (ECS 29), Cleric, Druid, "Erudite" variant Psion (with Spell to Power ACF), Wizard

Other(12): Aberrant Paragon (DragMag332 45), Eidoloncer (Gh 17), Drow Paragon, Dwarf Paragon, Elf Paragon, Gnome Paragon, Half-Dragon Paragon, Half-Elf Paragon, Half-Orc Paragon, Halfling Paragon, Human Paragon, Kobold Paragon, Orc Paragon, Tiefling Paragon

Fundamentally JK's list plus extras. Unfinished why section in reply #5. Also, this is the only Tier thread that appears in BG's Handbook Index, no wonder why I recalled it so readily.

#2 Ubernoob & Tshern's work: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2252.0

(click to show/hide)

Tier 1: Open ended limitless power.  Nothing completely fucks these classes.
Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer.

Tier 2: Limited access to true power, but incredibly powerful.  Few things completely fuck these classes.
Examples: Favoured Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, Wu Jen, Spirit Shaman

Tier 3: Able to do very well in its specialty, ability to be competent in several areas.  Few things completely fuck these classes.
Examples: Crusader, Rogue, Binder, Duskblade, Warblade, Psychic Warrior, Incarnate, Totemist, Shugenja, Ardent

Tier 4: Competent in area of specialty, but not able to fill multiple roles on the fly.  Many things fuck these classes.  Typically one trick ponies.
Examples: Swordsage, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Adept, Fighter, Bard, Factotum, Rokugan Ninja, Shugenja

Tier 5: I cut myself at night classes.  These classes have trouble even in the area of specialization.
Examples: Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Soulknife, Expert, Paladin, Spellthief, Hexblade, Marshal, Soulborn

Tier 6: I just shot myself in the balls classes.  These classes can't do anything even if they specialize in it.
Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner, Lurk, Divine Mind

Notable removal of ACF/Feats changing Tiers, couple bump arounds, even provides a cut and dry sorting method. Read his thread for additional comments on it.

#3, I can list my self too: Page 1 of the Tier thread here.

(click to show/hide)

Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!

(click to show/hide)

Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.

As noted it's a scale of mundane-to-caster. Because spellcasting is an excuse to claim otherwise in everything, more you have the better. Also you'll note despite me pointing out the Monk is superior to ever other mundane (thanks to his magical supernatural abilities and how unarmed strike readily accepts all sorts of magical effects btw) he fundamentally is listed in the same area. He attacks stuff, he uses Skills, that's it. Even the Paladin's very combat oriented spell list heals, scrys, and prepares camp. Then with a single Feat/Item later it transports, bypasses, charms, summons, CCs, and so on. There is just that much of massive gap just between 5 & 4, and it's all because one side obtains partial spellcasting.

#4 Prime32's Sig: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=12678.msg428894#msg428894

(click to show/hide)

The tier system in a nutshell:

(click to show/hide)

Tier 6: A cartographer.
Tier 5: An expert cartographer or a decent marksman.
Tier 4: An expert marksman.
Tier 3: An expert marksman, cartographer and chef who can tie strong knots and is trained in hostage negotiation or a marksman so good he can shoot down every bullet fired by a minigun while armed with a rusted single-shot pistol that veers to the left.
Tier 2: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything, or the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.
Tier 1: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything and the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.

Not a real class list, but it contains a definition to list them. T6 is NPCs, T5 is NPC little PC, T4 is single focus PC, T3 is versatile PC, T2 is spellcaster with a limited known list, T1 is a limitless known spellcaster

And I randomly clicked around on a pages in BG's Tier thread and I want to share these two finds.
Page 48 has a nice comment: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293.msg440883#msg440883

(click to show/hide)

Can we agree that anything with alter self, polymorph, and/or animate dead on its spell list or as a SLA is automanically a tier 4 (hexblade, spellthief, warlock, adept, SotAO paladin).

Page 36, a second opinion: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293.msg390963#msg390963

(click to show/hide)

Can't you guys just agree that a DN is at the top end of Tier 3? Even without trying too much that should be evident.

No, because I was never saying that the Dread Necromancer is placed wrong, I was saying that what the Tiers purport to measure in the first place is deliberately left vague, and is largely meaningless in the first place.

A Dread Necromancer has Planar Binding Efeerti with basically no optimization at all, but you have to assume that is banned for the game to even function, so any claims about Dread Necromancers balance are always really claims about Dread Necromancers balance after you ban everything they do that is too powerful with no optimization at all. The very idea of comparing a Dread Necromancer at equal optimization as a Sorcerer, at any level of Optimization, requires the assumption that you start by banning the Dread Necromancers most powerful ability (but not the Sorcerers.) So the idea of comparing them at "equal levels of optimization" where you let the Sorcerer spend all his resources on unbanned tricks, but explicitly ban all the tricks that come for free with the Dread Necro class (Hell, we just had a poster say that it's not fair for the Dread Necro to take Rainbow Servant, but of course all Sorcerers have MotAO) you aren't making an accurate comparison of anything. It is literally meaningless to sort these classes into tiers based on their banned tricks.

Now, JaronK has worn me down, as he always does, with walls of text that consist of about 20% claims that I've never played the class, 20% being confused at how the class or associated rules work, 20% claims that doing X isn't a part of the class, because it requires feat or race or items, and 40% useless trash that has nothing to do with what I just said, or just straight up lies. So fuck it.

"I've never said anything like that.  I believe what I said was closer to "don't whine about a Human with an Item Familiar riding a domesticated mount being cheesy when you're using a Necropolitan Strongheart Halfling with an Item Familiar and an even bigger mount."   Equivalence, mate.  If you want to test the power of classes, you have to make sure that everything other than the class is the same.  It's really rather basic."

You would be wrong. What you said was that you were throwing a tantrum, and you wouldn't play in the test, because it wasn't fair for me to have used the Warbeast Template and Item Familiar better than you.

I asked you not to use those two. You said that your Factotum absolutely had to have them, and that if he didn't, we were nerfing him, I said fine, and built my characters, and used both of them better than you, and you responded by quitting the test in protest of how unfair it was for me to use those two the way I did.

It was literally a perfect example of you using tricks, and then complaining that other classes gain more from those exact same tricks than your favorite class, so it's not fair when they use them.

It also wasn't Necropolitain.

And also Grilled's post gets a mention: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0

(click to show/hide)

Can't quote the links correctly, so just hit the link.
The list is even the same as JKs as each poster approaches the goal of why X is in Y rather than correctly handling things as wat does X belong in so you've still got those inconstancies. But the fact Grilled sought opinion on the project was such an improvement he even triggered a positive response out of me.

And there is nothing stopping you from making a new thread. As noted, progression in this area was set back.

***

Found everything using google and tried limiting my self to 30mins of poking around (including post formatting). Kind of went back and looked for Prime's Sig which ate more time through. Then reformatted the post. Oh were did the time go. Anyway, point being I spent less than an hour to present that list. Imagine what you could find if you actually researched the topic.