Expert vs Monk Challenge!

[X-Codes]

Skill or Item optimization is of little to no value to measuring classes. The ability to craft them in 99% of the cases is subsumed in the fact everyone has free access anyway. What matters is what you can do without them, what items do to augment YOUR abilities, and yes what your abilities can do to augment items (to a lesser extent). In a less than humorless paragraph; the Monk is better than an Expert. Expert is limited to nothing but skill optimization, the monk on the other hand can still punch his way though the Expert's house and could probably beat a cat. the PsyWar is better than a monk because even without getting into infinite PP the power access is just plain better than the Monk features. Devolving things into who has what items is a sure sign of losing.

The Monk can punch his way through the Expert's house, and the Expert can drive a herd of cattle through the Monk's.  That's the problem with the Monk, his method of dealing damage is inferior even to using the Handle Animal skill to train a pet to deal damage, and any combat stunt the Monk can do is probably done better by a sufficiently large critter the Expert can raise.

So yes, all Tier 5's are good for is skill optimization.  It's the only way they can attain any respectable amount of power, and Monks suck at it.

[skydragonknight]

Huh? Of course the Monk is better. He has 19 Druid levels.

[Bauglir]

To actually state my opinion, the monk is clearly better. The Expert can pull of skill optimization more easily than the Monk, so it does have an edge. But the Monk can accomplish all the same effects, and it gets enough skill points that it doesn't have to dump valuable points into Int (as a Fighter would to get access to the 3 Abusable Skills, for instance; an Expert, obviously, doesn't have to either), so it's not really a point against the Monk. Yes, ranks in Handle Animal and UMD are cross-class barring some trick to nab them as class skills (do we have a handbook on this, by the way? I feel like there are bound to be ways of getting them). Presumably, if these abilities are worth being an Expert to get, then getting them and still having all good saves and some class features (however terrible) is, strictly speaking, better.

Handle Animal has fixed DCs that are trivial to make for the broken uses. UMD has fixed DCs that are slightly less trivial, but still not difficult. By level 10, neither of them should fail either Handle Animal or UMD checks, ever. Diplomacy is harder to get to the point where you cannot fail the best check (you need a +49), but do you really think the +4 synergy bonuses are going to be that big a deal? If they are, the monk can afford to dump the 20 skill points into those skills by the time those numbers are realistic anyway. It already has Diplomacy as a class skill, so this is really all it lacks in the Diplomancer arena (and it does have easier entry into Tattooed Monk as a Diplomancer staple, which is at least something to be considered, if not a solid point on its own).

So, basically, the Expert can be more effective through skill abuse at lower levels, but the Monk does at least have class features. Skill abuse probably does let the Expert win, though, because of UMD with consumables and Handle Animal shenanigans, but I would expect the Monk to be capable of similar shenanigans by level 6 or 7 in at least one of the important skills that it doesn't have as a class skill by default. By the time the Monk has caught up to the Expert in ability to meet these DCs, being a Monk is strictly better.

[Sobolev]

To actually state my opinion, the monk is clearly better. The Expert can pull of skill optimization more easily than the Monk, so it does have an edge. But the Monk can accomplish all the same effects, and it gets enough skill points that it doesn't have to dump valuable points into Int (as a Fighter would to get access to the 3 Abusable Skills, for instance; an Expert, obviously, doesn't have to either), so it's not really a point against the Monk. Yes, ranks in Handle Animal and UMD are cross-class barring some trick to nab them as class skills (do we have a handbook on this, by the way? I feel like there are bound to be ways of getting them). Presumably, if these abilities are worth being an Expert to get, then getting them and still having all good saves and some class features (however terrible) is, strictly speaking, better.

As I was trying to explain in my post.  If you spend feats to get those abilities it is worth being an Expert to get, then your class features as a monk have to be worth giving up those feats.  Most monk class features are worse than feats.  Sorry.

[Bauglir]

Your argument isn't particularly convincing. We're not measuring any individual monk class feature compared to a single feat. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that each class skill takes 1 feat (this seems like a terrible tradeoff, but since Able Learner only gets us halfway there, let's roll with it).

Monk vs Expert: Monk has +1 hit point per level on average, 2 more good saves, 2 fewer skill points, less optimal class skills (still has Diplomacy, though), and class features that amount to a better AC (Expert is restricted to Light armor but doesn't have any abilities that synergize with that), a couple extra attacks in a round, the potential for unarmed damage shenanigans (I know there are builds with >20d8 floating around), better movement speed, some not-entirely-terrible bonus feats, evasion, and a bunch of other random bullshit that doesn't synergize terribly well.

Would a pair of feats that, between them, granted the above be balanced? That giant pile of stuff isn't great, and it's about on par with (say) 11 feats, but I don't think you'll be spending 11 feats to pick up the Expert's tricks.

That said, the entire rest of the post you quoted the first part of explained why you don't need to spend feats to duplicate an Expert's good tricks, just why you need to spend them to duplicate those tricks early.

[lans]

Wild Cohort and the heritage feats might be on par, but thats 3 feats due to a prereq.

[X-Codes]

Your argument isn't particularly convincing. We're not measuring any individual monk class feature compared to a single feat. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that each class skill takes 1 feat (this seems like a terrible tradeoff, but since Able Learner only gets us halfway there, let's roll with it).

Monk vs Expert: Monk has +1 hit point per level on average, 2 more good saves, 2 fewer skill points, less optimal class skills (still has Diplomacy, though), and class features that amount to a better AC (Expert is restricted to Light armor but doesn't have any abilities that synergize with that), a couple extra attacks in a round, the potential for unarmed damage shenanigans (I know there are builds with <20d8 floating around), better movement speed, some not-entirely-terrible bonus feats, evasion, and a bunch of other random bullshit that doesn't synergize terribly well.

Would a pair of feats that, between them, granted the above be balanced? That giant pile of stuff isn't great, and it's about on par with (say) 11 feats, but I don't think you'll be spending 11 feats to pick up the Expert's tricks.

That said, the entire rest of the post you quoted the first part of explained why you don't need to spend feats to duplicate an Expert's good tricks, just why you need to spend them to duplicate those tricks early.

I suppose you have a point.  The Monk abilities are *maybe* worth 11 feats if you include the chassis.  If not, then you're pushing it saying it's worth 8.

[Sir Giacomo]

Funny thread.

Anyhow, for comparing the two classes:
A monk has four bonus feats more than the expert. This could translate into nymph's kiss and feats like education, able learner, skill knowledge and aereni focus. Which means that (given the monk already has more class skills than the expert to start with), the expert advantage of more flexible class skills is virtually nil and the advantage of 2 skill points/level is reduced to 1/level.

The light armour proficiency is equated by the monk's AC plus WIS.
The simple weapon proficiency is equated by the monk's mixture of several simple and exotic weapons.

So... we basically have 1 skill point/level that the expert somehow has to put to a use that is superior to the monk's remaining class abilities (more attacks, better saves, more hp and self-healing, more damage, immunities, spell resistance, dimension door, etheralness, etc).

I somehow doubt that the expert is in the same league as the monk, as also hinted by the DMG (p. 107).

- Giacomo

[Midnight_v]

a monk has four bonus feats more than the expert. This could translate into nymph's kiss and feats like education, able learner, skill knowledge and aereni focus. Which means that (given the monk already has more class skills than the expert to start with), the expert advantage of more flexible class skills is virtually nil and the advantage of 2 skill points/level is reduced to 1/level.

Right... uhm I think all thats already been covered, or at least a close proximity thereof. One of the key interesting things about this is that we have discussions like Monk v. Expert at all...monk is just not very good over all.

I somehow doubt that the expert is in the same league as the monk, as also hinted by the DMG (p. 107).

You doubt it on some level but that's likely due to a serious bias on your behalf. Frankly, the mistake made in this thread is that we let someone build a anti-expert build at all. When really we should be running a same game test.
They really are in the same league, expecially in the way that you've explained monks to everyone. A class that cannot function well, but can be awesome if you have the proper equipment optimization.
Yeah they're about the same level.
When discussing party contributions and role.

[Mixster]

Monks probably aren't Tier 5, as they can be Wild Monks (dragon Mag 324). That lose their bonus feats, diplomacy, and a bunch of stuff you don't care about to get wild shape. Although their Wild Shape is worse than a druid of equal level, it is still significant enough to pull him out of Tier 5, since it eliminates most of the problematic MAD.

At level 10 you would have 3 wildshapes per day and be able to change into small and medium creatures. That means you can turn into a Baboon or something, take beast strike and hit your opponent for both unarmed and claw damage with one attack.

Yes, with Handle Animal you might be able to train a roc, or with diplomacy you can talk a horde of angry wizards into blasting cpt. monk. But that is severe TO, if you go simply with what a reasonable DM would let fly, I don't think those things are remotely alright.

I second the idea for a same game test. What should the obstacles be for a level 10 character? Getting past a bunch of mundane traps, then one magical, followed by a fight against a level appropriate encounter?

[Bauglir]

Your argument isn't particularly convincing. We're not measuring any individual monk class feature compared to a single feat. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that each class skill takes 1 feat (this seems like a terrible tradeoff, but since Able Learner only gets us halfway there, let's roll with it).

Monk vs Expert: Monk has +1 hit point per level on average, 2 more good saves, 2 fewer skill points, less optimal class skills (still has Diplomacy, though), and class features that amount to a better AC (Expert is restricted to Light armor but doesn't have any abilities that synergize with that), a couple extra attacks in a round, the potential for unarmed damage shenanigans (I know there are builds with >20d8 floating around), better movement speed, some not-entirely-terrible bonus feats, evasion, and a bunch of other random bullshit that doesn't synergize terribly well.

Would a pair of feats that, between them, granted the above be balanced? That giant pile of stuff isn't great, and it's about on par with (say) 11 feats, but I don't think you'll be spending 11 feats to pick up the Expert's tricks.

That said, the entire rest of the post you quoted the first part of explained why you don't need to spend feats to duplicate an Expert's good tricks, just why you need to spend them to duplicate those tricks early.

I suppose you have a point.  The Monk abilities are *maybe* worth 11 feats if you include the chassis.  If not, then you're pushing it saying it's worth 8.

Point. And yeah, I'll point out again that this isn't particularly great for the Monk and isn't enough to pull it out of the same Tier as skill-optimization-only. All those class features and the chassis are technically better than nothing, but eh. Also, I had the greater than sign reversed, fixing that now. *headdesk* It's not exactly fair, since that sort of thing requires specific optimization for it, but still, the 2d10 you get naturally isn't TERRIBLE, even if it is only +4 damage on average over a greatsword.

[Midnight_v]

Monks probably aren't Tier 5, as they can be Wild Monks (dragon Mag 324).

 

I forgot about dragon magazine. Yeah if you can use all of the dragon material, you get some different reslults from without.
Thats likely not a good rubric to determine the tier of a class though. Maybe thats just me... though.
I'm sure we can google the same game test and get some of the answers.

[Sir Giacomo]

One of the key interesting things about this is that we have discussions like Monk v. Expert at all...monk is just not very good over all.
(...)You doubt it on some level but that's likely due to a serious bias on your behalf.

Has it never struck you as odd that threads like these exist when clearly a comparison of the npc class to the monk can only be considered ridiculous?
Is this not rather some indication of a serious bias of a different sort, by different people?

- Giacomo

[ninjarabbit]

Has it never struck you as odd that threads like these exist when clearly a comparison of the npc class to the monk can only be considered ridiculous?
Is this not rather some indication of a serious bias of a different sort, by different people?

- Giacomo

Pot meet kettle

And it's even funnier when you consider that the expert is winning this thread. Of course we haven't even mentioned the fact that the adept blows the monk out of the water.

[Mixster]

Ok, so we are running that Same Game test, this is from: http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons_Wiki:The_Same_Game_Test
[spoiler]A Level 10 Same Game Test
    * A hallway filled with magical runes.
    * A Fire Giant.
    * A Young Blue Dragon.
    * A Bebilith.
    * A Vrock.
    * A tag team of Mind Flayers.
    * An Evil Necromancer.
    * 6 Trolls.
    * 12 Shadows. [/spoiler]
Then we need to discuss which sources we allow. Lets assume we allow just about everything.
And then we just need to fill in some details as to how Cpt. Monk and Mr. Expert handle each encounter. With a given build.

[Bauglir]

Yes, the adept is so much better than the Monk that it's kinda funny. As for the Expert, I remain unconvinced, if only because a Monk can do literally anything an Expert can, and still have class features not worth having and a better chassis on the side. X + any positive number is necessarily greater than X, even if X and the positive number in question are very small.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

With kalamar material (specifically, skill prodigy), the monk blows the expert out of the water, since he gets the necessary class skills for the price of a single feat.

[Sir Giacomo]

Pot meet kettle

And it's even funnier when you consider that the expert is winning this thread. Of course we haven't even mentioned the fact that the adept blows the monk out of the water.

How so? Maybe you would like to point out exactly how with 1 more skill point per level, the expert is going to beat all of the additional class abilities the monk has?

But it is not just me who called this bluff - carnivore and SorO_Lost have done so already a couple of pages ago.

- Giacomo

[Solo]

Well, when you consider that the Expert can have UMD as a class skill, it seems that he gets more mileage out of his skill points than the monk who tries to do the same.

[Bauglir]

*eyetwitch*

Solo... have you actually read the last couple of pages? Yes, an Expert is more efficient at doing something you don't have to be extremely efficient at to break the game. Hoo-fucking-ray. UMD has fixed DCs. You don't need it to be a class skill. Able Learner is enough, even if your max ranks are still halved. If you can use what TML brought up (presumably one of those books that are technically WotC 3.5 but nobody every thinks of because they're a campaign setting owned by somebody else), you can even get it as an actual class skill. As much as I recognize that the monk class sucks, compared to the Expert, it's worth more than a feat or two or whatever you have to spend on making it worthwhile to do exactly what the Expert can do, only with free shit like fast movement (that is the use of the word shit as a pejorative, by the way. Modern culture's made that a bit confusing, I know)