Adept vs monk: the final nail in the coffin

[Lunaramblings]

I would switch Undead leadership away, because it is just ridiculous. Any build can be amazing with it and tells little of the power of the class. Otherwise I do like the character though.

Honestly I had an extra feat lol. Really, the only great thing given by it in this case was 3/day Create Undead and Desecrate. Which given I still have a TON of cash left, I could probably just by similar items and use the feat for something else, I guess applying another Corpsecrafter benefit?

[SorO_Lost]

Ok. So I don't really post on here often, but figured I would give this a shot.
<snip>Animate Dead & Cohort(s)!</snip>

Core element of your build is essentially nothing but reduce the price of using Animate Undead. If nothing else, today I learned a single level dip into Pale Master is better than the entire Adapt class. Well, that and Wight's +4 LA is totally worth free undead in a low power game.

So I take it that you didn't bother to actually read the build at all. Nothing in my build cheapens the costs. Craft Gemcutting is in there to due free healing on self, as a Warforged. Of course, if you actually bothered to read before commenting I clearly laid that out. Thanks for not taking the time or consideration to actually read a post before dismissing it.

Oh so you did. I just remember any healing method that takes 8 hours to preform outside of sleep and replaced it with the much better alternative of crafting material components. Consider all comments about cheapening the cost of undead replaced by awesome a robot out to kill humanity, but I'm probably wrong on that too.

[Solo]

Will the robots be able to time travel?

[Halinn]

Will the robots be able to time travel?

Yes. Forward in time, at a rate of 1:1

[Lunaramblings]

Ok. So I don't really post on here often, but figured I would give this a shot.
<snip>Animate Dead & Cohort(s)!</snip>

Core element of your build is essentially nothing but reduce the price of using Animate Undead. If nothing else, today I learned a single level dip into Pale Master is better than the entire Adapt class. Well, that and Wight's +4 LA is totally worth free undead in a low power game.

So I take it that you didn't bother to actually read the build at all. Nothing in my build cheapens the costs. Craft Gemcutting is in there to due free healing on self, as a Warforged. Of course, if you actually bothered to read before commenting I clearly laid that out. Thanks for not taking the time or consideration to actually read a post before dismissing it.

Oh so you did. I just remember any healing method that takes 8 hours to preform outside of sleep and replaced it with the much better alternative of crafting material components. Consider all comments about cheapening the cost of undead replaced by awesome a robot out to kill humanity, but I'm probably wrong on that too.

I suppose I could also shave a few bucks off each gem as I could buy a giant onyx or whatever uncut and do the work myself, but that seems like a hell of a stretch. And while it does take a while, it is still free healing. Also, thought I should point out, that the cool thing about Warforged with a Docent is that even while I am resting or whatever as I do not sleep, my Docent can take over guard duty and whatnot as it is an intelligent item that speaks and what not through me, so I am resting, but it is aware and watching my back.

[weenog]

I would switch Undead leadership away, because it is just ridiculous. Any build can be amazing with it and tells little of the power of the class. Otherwise I do like the character though.

Honestly I had an extra feat lol. Really, the only great thing given by it in this case was 3/day Create Undead and Desecrate. Which given I still have a TON of cash left, I could probably just by similar items and use the feat for something else, I guess applying another Corpsecrafter benefit?

Destruction Retribution helps with attrition problems.  One undead gives up the ghost, all his buddies and you get a little healing hit.

[Lunaramblings]

Destructive Retribution would be pretty good. I could even make a few really low hp undead to be used as sacrificial lambs to heal myself and my undead.

Heres a question, Warforged specifically mention healing by cure spells not being as effective, but this sort of healing is unrelated, would I benefit fully from this sort of healing?

[weenog]

It's only "spells from the healing subschool and supernatural abilities that cure hit point damage or ability damage" that get cut in half.  Destruction Retribution doesn't cure any damage, it inflicts it.  It's only your feat that's reversing the effect.

RE: Using low-HD undead to exploit the minimum 1d6 point burst regardless of HD, try a catapult full of rat skeletons sometime.

[Solo]

Lunaramblings, you have my respect.

[Lycanthromancer]

Another fun thing to do with undead: animate a swarm of rats or something, and have all of your horde carry around a handful of individual rats.

Guess what happens when clerics try to turn them?

[Twilightwyrm]

HOLY......

This is exactly what i mean. You have just totally perverted my clean, simple "imaginary scenarios" with ridiculous assumptions. You just only assumed in all scenarios that the monk will lose out and built from there.

Why would he lose initiative in the 60 ft. apart example? Why does the Expert have exactly the spells needed, why does the monk fail a save? Why is a PREPARED monk blind and has no light with him? Why can't he find an enemy in an obscuring mist... and how can your expert cast through that no problem?

And in the social challenge: Why does ONE roll or skill determine the outcome. Just having a probably higher diplomancy check doesn't make you a wizard in a city. The monk has other options (Maybe he is a great scout/ good at shadowing people. Maybe he can outfight people in a brawl better, maybe he can build a reputaion faster and more relaible, because of his powerful background. And even IF it is all one check, in all situations. Why does a +4 over another mean you have a 100% perfect chance to be always better?

The whole thing with using wands and magical items and such is: Defeating problems by throwing money at it. EVERYBODY (who has UMD) can do that.

Oh and also with flying: Come on. I know flying is powerful and all... but not EVERYBODY flies (all the time), well... at least nobody who paid the 55k? for flying boots. And of course prepared wizards and sorcerers etc. on mid-high levels.

So yeah... i would say: Experts, Adepts and monks have roughly the same ability to fly.

It's like there's a 24 page thread on this same forum that explains why Monks are worse, and you still have managed to not read any of it.

Also several of your defenses of monk are RP things that don't involve rules.  If your DM lets you just talk your way out of everything and not use skills at all, then that probably will help the monk substantially but has nothing to do with the game as written.   "maybe he can build a reputaion faster and more relaible, because of his powerful background. " what does that even mean?

Monk class features are worse than skill optimization, don't feel bad most things that low on the tier list have the same problem, and Experts are better at skill optimization by a good amount.  Further if the monk wants to TRY skill optimization he has to dump more stats and can't keep up with the point buy while maintaining his ability to do physical damage.  Which he really wasn't very good at anyway. 

Furthermore, even if he were good at shadowing people, an expert would be better because he has more skills.

I'm sorry, but I have to comment here (specifically, as this is where this issue began, your ensuing posts being an extension of this same issue). This is a highly abusive method of arguing for one core class over another, and I must agree with Summerstorm in his assessment that you are tailoring your theoretical examples to the preconceived notion that the monk will lose/fail. Not only are your examples easily countered by any number of theoretical monk builds, which you seem to decidedly ignore, but are generally incredulous in terms of their possible connection to the reality of a D&D campaign world (Please explain, for instance, what profession that an "Expert" would normally represent would ever be optimized for Use Magic Device, Diplomacy AND Handle Animal, the three skills you happen to love so much here, to say nothing of also investing in the requisite skills to provide them with synergy.)

[JaronK]

(Please explain, for instance, what profession that an "Expert" would normally represent would ever be optimized for Use Magic Device, Diplomacy AND Handle Animal, the three skills you happen to love so much here, to say nothing of also investing in the requisite skills to provide them with synergy.)

Adventuring, obviously.  The same profession as the Monk.  Surely you weren't expecting to see how Experts who were set up as village blacksmiths would do in an adventuring scenario, just like you would expect to see how Monks that were built as elderly monastery retirees would fare, right?

JaronK

[Twilightwyrm]

(Please explain, for instance, what profession that an "Expert" would normally represent would ever be optimized for Use Magic Device, Diplomacy AND Handle Animal, the three skills you happen to love so much here, to say nothing of also investing in the requisite skills to provide them with synergy.)

Adventuring, obviously.  The same profession as the Monk.  Surely you weren't expecting to see how Experts who were set up as village blacksmiths would do in an adventuring scenario, just like you would expect to see how Monks that were built as elderly monastery retirees would fare, right?

JaronK

Despite the fact that it is listed as one of those classes, specifically in the DMG, that DOES NOT make a habit of going adventuring you mean? Ignoring, further, that a good 99.9% of the population of the Expert class are the "village blacksmiths" you mentioned, and that only, maybe 10-20% of monks fit the "elderly monastery retirees" demographic. (Additionally ignoring for the moment, that you ignored the rest of what I said entirely, thereby missing the point) Seriously, do you see what you are doing here? You are responding to my quarry by creating an unequal and unrealistic model of comparison between the two classes. Just as you were with Summerstorm, and likely everyone else you've had this conversation with.

[JaronK]

Despite the fact that it is listed as one of those classes, specifically in the DMG, that DOES NOT make a habit of going adventuring you mean?

Sure, just like most Fighters are actually guards, mercenaries, or warlords.  Just like most Clerics are church functionaries, village preachers, and community leaders.  But obviously, we're talking about playing these classes as PCs... we're not talking about the random NPCs that do nothing interesting in the story.

Ignoring, further, that a good 99.9% of the population of the Expert class are the "village blacksmiths" you mentioned, and that only, maybe 10-20% of monks fit the "elderly monastery retirees" demographic.

I strongly doubt 99.9% of Experts are village blacksmiths.  For one thing, I imagine city blacksmiths are some of them.  Also, I bet there's other professions, like librarians and tailors and artists.  However, I imagine a heck of a lot of Monks are indeed folks that hang out in monasteries, while there's also plenty of them that wander about as impoverished truth seekers and the like.  But less than .1% of any class is PC adventurers.  Consider how many folks are just living in your metropolises that have nothing to do with the story.

(Additionally ignoring for the moment, that you ignored the rest of what I said entirely, thereby missing the point) Seriously, do you see what you are doing here? You are responding to my quarry by creating an unequal and unrealistic model of comparison between the two classes. Just as you were with Summerstorm, and likely everyone else you've had this conversation with.

I'm not ignoring your point.  I'm simply taking apart one of your arguments, namely the one where you want to compare a PC type Monk with an NPC type Expert.  Since this discussion actually started in regards to the tiers, we're talking exclusively about PCs and thus you're completely off target.

Furthermore, there's been no double standard, no setting up Monks to fail.  In fact, the Monks have been given amazing leniency.  Consider the fact that Giacomo was running around claiming that he could make these high Int Monks that were skillmonkeys and claiming they were solid... while at the same time claiming that undead creatures with over twice the hitpoints and far more immunities were liabilities that would die constantly.  That's your double standard.

The scenarios we've asked Monks to prove themselves in are the most basic, standard, and common of D&D scenarios.   Since Monks are billed as a combat class, we expect them to fight well at the very least (which they have terrible problems doing) and by Giacomo's own claims, they can't even do that (let's face it, he thinks the sort of undead you get via Animate Dead die all the time... and yet his Monks have all been far less survivable).

For Experts, well, they can handle their area of expertise (which they can pick from among the various skill areas).  And we expect when talking about PC Experts that they're going to pick useful adventuring skills (Diplomacy, UMD, Iaijutsu Focus, Handle Animal, Lucid Dreaming, etc), since we're not talking about the random guys about town.

JaronK

[Twilightwyrm]

Despite the fact that it is listed as one of those classes, specifically in the DMG, that DOES NOT make a habit of going adventuring you mean?

Sure, just like most Fighters are actually guards, mercenaries, or warlords.  Just like most Clerics are church functionaries, village preachers, and community leaders.  But obviously, we're talking about playing these classes as PCs... we're not talking about the random NPCs that do nothing interesting in the story.

Ignoring, further, that a good 99.9% of the population of the Expert class are the "village blacksmiths" you mentioned, and that only, maybe 10-20% of monks fit the "elderly monastery retirees" demographic.

I strongly doubt 99.9% of Experts are village blacksmiths.  For one thing, I imagine city blacksmiths are some of them.  Also, I bet there's other professions, like librarians and tailors and artists.  However, I imagine a heck of a lot of Monks are indeed folks that hang out in monasteries, while there's also plenty of them that wander about as impoverished truth seekers and the like.  But less than .1% of any class is PC adventurers.  Consider how many folks are just living in your metropolises that have nothing to do with the story.

(Additionally ignoring for the moment, that you ignored the rest of what I said entirely, thereby missing the point) Seriously, do you see what you are doing here? You are responding to my quarry by creating an unequal and unrealistic model of comparison between the two classes. Just as you were with Summerstorm, and likely everyone else you've had this conversation with.

I'm not ignoring your point.  I'm simply taking apart one of your arguments, namely the one where you want to compare a PC type Monk with an NPC type Expert.  Since this discussion actually started in regards to the tiers, we're talking exclusively about PCs and thus you're completely off target.

Furthermore, there's been no double standard, no setting up Monks to fail.  In fact, the Monks have been given amazing leniency.  Consider the fact that Giacomo was running around claiming that he could make these high Int Monks that were skillmonkeys and claiming they were solid... while at the same time claiming that undead creatures with over twice the hitpoints and far more immunities were liabilities that would die constantly.  That's your double standard.

The scenarios we've asked Monks to prove themselves in are the most basic, standard, and common of D&D scenarios.   Since Monks are billed as a combat class, we expect them to fight well at the very least (which they have terrible problems doing) and by Giacomo's own claims, they can't even do that (let's face it, he thinks the sort of undead you get via Animate Dead die all the time... and yet his Monks have all been far less survivable).

For Experts, well, they can handle their area of expertise (which they can pick from among the various skill areas).  And we expect when talking about PC Experts that they're going to pick useful adventuring skills (Diplomacy, UMD, Iaijutsu Focus, Handle Animal, Lucid Dreaming, etc), since we're not talking about the random guys about town.

JaronK

Given the PC's pasts reasonably involve any number of of these previous careers, whereas the expert you describe lack any sort of realistic past. So I'm sorry, but you'll have to explain the point of your first comment here.

The "village blacksmith" I was talking about is the archetypical expert I was using for example, hence the quotation marks (although I suspect you already knew that). Yes Experts fill a number of different, non-combat/non-adventuring, roles, which does represent around 99.9% of the Expert population. And actually, given the fluff associated with them, most actual monks are not laymen. Most are disciples training towards physical and mental enlightenment, or (in a small minority) possibly impoverished wanderers (which are still more likely to prevail in the aforementioned situations than the 99.9% of the "Village Blacksmiths" out there). The people you seem to be associating with "monks" are more than likely clerics and, a bit ironically, experts.

Well, if you are picking one argument, I must than wonder why you picked the argument that was largely secondary to my main point, other than for perceived  expedience. I am not defending everything Summerstorm (who I'll assume is the one you are referring to as Giacomo) has put forward. I am saying your treatments of the monk, via the comparisons you are making with the expert/adept here are unequal and unrealistic. Further, here you seem focused on what I can only imagine is previously "established" evidence. Arguments, which I might add, you have not established here. Further, the original discussion was not strictly concerning the tiers, but rather the state of the monk vs the adept, and to a lesser extant the expert. (Where it devolved to here is not my concern) So, instead of making the blank, unsupported claims that the monk fails at its apparent responsibilities these things, how about we stick to the original argument here, which is after all what my post was concerning. (Oh and in theory those skills are fine. In practice, you are scavenging skills from multiple, potentially conflicting campaign settings. Needless to say, this makes any Expert build including them rather unrealistic)

[ImperatorK]

What conflicting campaign settings? I don't follow.
Do you mean different handbooks?

[Halinn]

Despite the fact that it is listed as one of those classes, specifically in the DMG, that DOES NOT make a habit of going adventuring you mean?

Sure, just like most Fighters are actually guards, mercenaries, or warlords.  Just like most Clerics are church functionaries, village preachers, and community leaders.  But obviously, we're talking about playing these classes as PCs... we're not talking about the random NPCs that do nothing interesting in the story.

Ignoring, further, that a good 99.9% of the population of the Expert class are the "village blacksmiths" you mentioned, and that only, maybe 10-20% of monks fit the "elderly monastery retirees" demographic.

I strongly doubt 99.9% of Experts are village blacksmiths.  For one thing, I imagine city blacksmiths are some of them.  Also, I bet there's other professions, like librarians and tailors and artists.  However, I imagine a heck of a lot of Monks are indeed folks that hang out in monasteries, while there's also plenty of them that wander about as impoverished truth seekers and the like.  But less than .1% of any class is PC adventurers.  Consider how many folks are just living in your metropolises that have nothing to do with the story.

(Additionally ignoring for the moment, that you ignored the rest of what I said entirely, thereby missing the point) Seriously, do you see what you are doing here? You are responding to my quarry by creating an unequal and unrealistic model of comparison between the two classes. Just as you were with Summerstorm, and likely everyone else you've had this conversation with.

I'm not ignoring your point.  I'm simply taking apart one of your arguments, namely the one where you want to compare a PC type Monk with an NPC type Expert.  Since this discussion actually started in regards to the tiers, we're talking exclusively about PCs and thus you're completely off target.

Furthermore, there's been no double standard, no setting up Monks to fail.  In fact, the Monks have been given amazing leniency.  Consider the fact that Giacomo was running around claiming that he could make these high Int Monks that were skillmonkeys and claiming they were solid... while at the same time claiming that undead creatures with over twice the hitpoints and far more immunities were liabilities that would die constantly.  That's your double standard.

The scenarios we've asked Monks to prove themselves in are the most basic, standard, and common of D&D scenarios.   Since Monks are billed as a combat class, we expect them to fight well at the very least (which they have terrible problems doing) and by Giacomo's own claims, they can't even do that (let's face it, he thinks the sort of undead you get via Animate Dead die all the time... and yet his Monks have all been far less survivable).

For Experts, well, they can handle their area of expertise (which they can pick from among the various skill areas).  And we expect when talking about PC Experts that they're going to pick useful adventuring skills (Diplomacy, UMD, Iaijutsu Focus, Handle Animal, Lucid Dreaming, etc), since we're not talking about the random guys about town.

JaronK

Given the PC's pasts reasonably involve any number of of these previous careers, whereas the expert you describe lack any sort of realistic past. So I'm sorry, but you'll have to explain the point of your first comment here.

The "village blacksmith" I was talking about is the archetypical expert I was using for example, hence the quotation marks (although I suspect you already knew that). Yes Experts fill a number of different, non-combat/non-adventuring, roles, which does represent around 99.9% of the Expert population. And actually, given the fluff associated with them, most actual monks are not laymen. Most are disciples training towards physical and mental enlightenment, or (in a small minority) possibly impoverished wanderers (which are still more likely to prevail in the aforementioned situations than the 99.9% of the "Village Blacksmiths" out there). The people you seem to be associating with "monks" are more than likely clerics and, a bit ironically, experts.

Well, if you are picking one argument, I must than wonder why you picked the argument that was largely secondary to my main point, other than for perceived  expedience. I am not defending everything Summerstorm (who I'll assume is the one you are referring to as Giacomo) has put forward. I am saying your treatments of the monk, via the comparisons you are making with the expert/adept here are unequal and unrealistic. Further, here you seem focused on what I can only imagine is previously "established" evidence. Arguments, which I might add, you have not established here. Further, the original discussion was not strictly concerning the tiers, but rather the state of the monk vs the adept, and to a lesser extant the expert. (Where it devolved to here is not my concern) So, instead of making the blank, unsupported claims that the monk fails at its apparent responsibilities these things, how about we stick to the original argument here, which is after all what my post was concerning. (Oh and in theory those skills are fine. In practice, you are scavenging skills from multiple, potentially conflicting campaign settings. Needless to say, this makes any Expert build including them rather unrealistic)

1) While 99.9% of experts are NPCs that are just village blacksmiths and the like, the PC experts being made in this thread are, in fact, in the 0.1% that aren't. This is a debate on whether or not the NPC classes, properly optimized for adventuring, would be roughly as useful as the monk class (and in the adept's case, it has to prove that it is as useful in the role in tries to perform optimally in, as well as being good in other areas).

2) The skill list mentioned with Iaijutsu Focus and Lucid Dreaming et al. is just representative of how strong skills are for the expert, not a list of skills Adventuring Expert #04 has.

[veekie]

Yeah, the typical expert gets along fine with oh, Diplomacy, Use Magic Device and Handle Animal. Any one of which would suffice and two of which commonly appear on Experts anyway.

Also the expert business was in the other thread. This here is where the Adept, being a spellcaster, would curbstomp more competent classes than the monk at being useful.

[LordBlades]

A guy that makes a living by taming wild animals and selling them but dreams to become a wizard?

He knows how to tame animals (Handle Animal), he knows how to talk people into buying his stuff (social skills) and in his free time he studies how to become a wizard, so he learns how to cast spells off scrolls and wands(UMD).


Also, it's funny to see you're so outraged by the expert's skill selection while you conveniently leave out Giacomo's Skill Prodigy monk that sinks most of his points into Int and ignores Monk class features in an attempt to emulate an Expert.

[ImperatorK]

Also, it's funny to see you're so outraged by the expert's skill selection while you conveniently leave out Giacomo's Skill Prodigy monk that sinks most of his points into Int and ignores Monk class features in an attempt to emulate an Expert.

Did he? (I'm assuming your talking about Twilightwyrm)