Adept vs monk: the final nail in the coffin

[PhaedrusXY]

I like the sneaky adept (I have a soft place for stealthy spellcasters ).

while the unseen servant will not really trigger most trapdoors designed for big threats vs the dragon and such. Still, I like the unseen-servant-as-scout-idea.

It can drag something like 50 lbs, which is heavier than most halfling-sized PCs. So give it a log (or a scarecrow, which is what I actually do when I use this trick).

[Kajhera]

As a white dragon, I'd have to say yes, personally, the guy with the fire spells is priority to neutralize. The rest will be hampered more by my defenses at that level, and dealing with them can be delayed. Also, they may take longer to destroy.

And what if there's a Swordsage or Warmage among the group?  What if that Rogue is having fun with Alchemist's Fire?  What if that Fighter was archery focused?  

By saying the Adept is automatically the priority target, we're saying Adepts are far more of a threat than anything else there.  And that kind of defeats the purpose here...

JaronK

I might change targets to the Swordsage or Warmage once they started using fire - if it were as potent. Would expect the low-level rogue to have a bit of difficulty actually getting sneak attack with that Alchemist's Fire, truthfully, and I can't target him so well if he can anyway. Against an archer ... well, depends what they do?

If that many people are shooting me with ranged attacks I might bother to use one of the possible ways for a mature adult white dragon to whip up concealment in a snowy, icy, crystal-strewn lair, but that's not choosing a target.

I don't got a dog in this fight, just observing that fire is bad and ice is pretty.  

Happens I'd rather play an adept than a monk or a fighter or a warmage.

[Tleilaxu_Ghola]

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

[X-Codes]

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

I don't know, but somehow we keep getting back to the point where people saying that the Monk is a better class than the Adept because the dragon doesn't use tactics to counter the Monk's abilities while it can easily counter the Adept's (nevermind that the Dragon doesn't *need* to use tactics to kill a lone monk).  Something like that, anyway.  It's like I've said, I don't really know why they're arguing anymore.

[Lycanthromancer]

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

The problem is that the monk is basically ENTIRELY reliant on party buffs and items. It's the same problem with the fighter, but to a larger degree.

[JaronK]

Dragon tactics to counter Monk: use Crush attack.  Instant pin.  Game over.

JaronK

[SorO_Lost]

The blink does not grant fly. The spell doesn't mention it, and when you fall half of the time, you cannot really move up (whenever the monk is in the material plane he falls and does not float).

Note ~ ethereal creatures can't fly either, they can just move in any direction. So yeah, it don't say you can fly, it does say ethereal creatures (which are are one 1/2 the time) can move in any direction. 1/2 the time total freedom, 1/2 the time subject to gravity. Oh what can end this debate? Idk, but jumping while material sounds corny and Blink's swap rate being timed in which ever way is favorable to the character sure points to "Find a rules quote to prove it otherwise I'm going to dick up like the other 99% of the people in this thread so bite me".

Total concealment does not negate listen for pinpointing,

I'm not sure where you are going with Listen, you need to beat the opposed Move Silently check by 20 to pin-point a creature (my monk has +24 for avg DC 54) and it still maintains Full-Concealment anyway. You do know the dragon has Blindsense which automatically does the same exact thing right?

nor does lifesense allow you to pinpoint a hidden opponent as far as I understand the feat.

Which is none, the description says "You see the light that all living creatures emit." and just what do you think the Spot DC of a HUGE GLOWING DRAGON is?

To your eyes, a Medium or smaller creature gives off life force sufficient to provide bright illumination in a 60-foot radius, revealing itself and all features and objects in range to your life-adapted sight. <snip> A Large creature gives off life-light in a 120-foot radius, and the radius doubles again for each additional size category larger than Medium, up to a maximum radius of 960 feet for a Colossal creature.

snakeman830 already pointed out the hp damage from level loss

Yeah, my bad. Since I'm still to lazy to actually increase the level of the example, I guess I'll factor the +3 BAB gained, which in turn is +3 more to PA, which is +6 as THF and +18 after multipliers and +36 total using Snap Kick (vs counting on lifedrinker for 20). Really, the more effort I put into detailing the level 12 version, the more powerful it's going to be over me tacking two items onto the level 9 character. I just don't care to update the build.

Then, the lifedrinker is a specific weapon and I thus do not think it can be combined easily with a monk weapon and/or the other enhancements that you already assumed in your build (like valorous).

Why are you even on the side of the Monk? You're just so horrible at it, go join the Adapt team and drag them down.
Savage Species, Necklace of Natural Weapons. Read it. Learn it. Memorize it. Use it.
Srsly, it's been mentioned in every Monk thread ever, multiple items. Also, I'm using a Butter Fly sword anyway, for Iaijitsu Focus. Which come to think about isn't even factored in the damage outputs since I keep hitting overkill...

As for stealing certain enhancements, Meh. MiC flat out states you can improve specific weapons like any other, which is what we've done for years but now have rules backing such. What else we've done (even had a resource thread prior to deletion on WotC) is rip the abilities them selves out. Something that if you get into total RAW requires Morphing to pull off (which changes the weapon into whatever you want). But hey, it's only contributing 5 points of HP loss per hit and with zero effort I came up with +18 more damage per hit to replace it so w/e, ignore it if it makes you feel warm inside or use it as a Greataxe since who cares about Furry of Blows while charging.

Is the butterfly sword a light weapon?

It's One Handed, thus can be THF. Valorous & Battle Jump both double your charge damage (making it an x3 for a total modifier, see stacking multipliers on why your math is wrong btw). Thus the 1d6 base damage becomes 3d6.

The Butterfly notes it uses your more favorable number attacks per round. Not that it can simply be Furryed like a Quarterstaff's rules state, but it uses your more favorable number attacks per round. Which when you think about it, Snap Kick + 12th level Furry is five attacks per round with a Full-Round Action, which means you can use the Butterfly Sword five times as a Full-Round Action (or standard if you want to get brokenz) plus you know, a Quarterstaff is a double weapon, not a THF or OHer being used as a THF making it better suited for charging.

***

For example, if his dominated minions are a Monk, a Rogue, a Warblade, and a Fighter, are you saying an Adept is clearly a bigger threat than all of them if he shoots a single ray?

If I were the Dragon and I seen a dominated Warblade, I'd pop a debuff on him. It is now in his best interest to IHS away what is the single most effect that is preventing him from kicking ass. Dominate. Sucks to be the Adapt...

***

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

I don't know, but somehow we keep getting back to the point where people saying that the Monk is a better class than the Adept because the dragon doesn't use tactics to counter the Monk's abilities while it can easily counter the Adept's (nevermind that the Dragon doesn't *need* to use tactics to kill a lone monk).  Something like that, anyway.  It's like I've said, I don't really know why they're arguing anymore.

I'm arguing for arguing sake. How could you have not realized that by now? I'm not for Monk is better than the Adapt or vice versa but I always thought using stuff better than you (pokemon/dominated/diplomacy) creatures doesn't do a damn thing to prove your worth. Plus like any spellcaster vs debate, the people on the spellcaster's side tend to be idiots with their ideas.

Think about it.

• We've had Web as an I win button despite in all likely hood the dragon is all but incapable of failing his save and strength checks against it.
• We've had Scorching Ray, ignoring the possibilities of missing despite Cover (via Web) & Soft Cover (via undead army) which as rules state should form some better form of cover and shooting into melee as an I win button. Not to mention the range being so tiny the dragon can still fly over and eat him anyway. Oh and it only deals 12d6+50% (or 63) on all three successful hits meaning it takes four castings and twelve attack rolls to kill it. Plus you know, it could burn that uber I win Web away when you use it...
• We had pick the most powerful creature in the DMG, then say I'm awesome for picking it on my team when in fact you still fail at life and suck goats for money.
• If the pokemon number one thing wasn't bad enough. They +1ed it to Dominating other PC-leveled people. Which still falls short of just Diplomacy'ing up a posse and still falls under I am so incompetent I am literally dependent on some one else making me look useful.

And what is said about the Monk?

• His 1/day DDoor was bashed because the Adapt can buy an ITEM. Also what's with the Monk owning items, though this is about Class Features.
• You can't charge in a Surprise round of falling on people because I never read what Charging or Battle Jump's rules are.
• The dragon can strafe around in mid air dealing 7d6 damage ever 1d4 rounds praying the Monk has no form of retaliation enough though a form of flight is mandatory for meleers and very plausible for a level 12 character to obtain. Not to mention without Polymorphing into something with wings, the Adapt is SOL too. Right... Pokemon.
• And Crush. Not only does the dragon NEVER use it on the Adapt (it's too busy staring at the wall), but it uses it for auto win on Monks. Even though it  only works if the subject is three or more size categories smaller than the Dragon, which is Huge, which means Medium is two sizes in difference, which means it can't use Crush to beat a Monk anyway. ...And even if the dragon were gargantuan or Monk/Adapt were Small sized at least the Monk sports a 50% chance it misses him (Blink) prior to DDooring out or the same ITEMS the Adapt must use for escaping after he got flattened.

That claim isn't far out in the left field there.

Edit - Fixed a quote tag.

[Tleilaxu_Ghola]

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

The problem is that the monk is basically ENTIRELY reliant on party buffs and items. It's the same problem with the fighter, but to a larger degree.

My point is that this is not even a problem to begin with.  The fact that it's perceived as a problem is a symptom of the artificial environment in which most C.O. is performed.  That is to say that a lot of builds try to cover as many possible scenarios by themselves as possible.  Maybe it's because I DM more often than I get to play, but I have long since become jaded against the idea that every character in the party needs to be some kind of rockstar one-man-band.  I find things go much more interestingly if players have synergistic tactics.  I should clarify that buzzword "synergistic", though.

I do not mean:
1. The party has a very optimized specialist for each area of commonly encountered problems.  Together the party usually has someone who can save the day single-handedly.  This type of party usually sucks because then the DM feels obliged to dish out "spotlight" encounters for each player to highlight their individual specialties.
2. The party has some awesome combo that sets up one character for greatness every time.

What I do mean is:
1. The party contains several "awesome" combos that set up various characters for greatness in combat.
2. The party is specialized, but not so completely that the builds are incapable of acting outside their role.  Bonus points if others can aid eachother with their specialties.



So, if we're going to bash monks, I'd rather see people tell me how a monk fails to integrate with party tactics.

[Solo]

Ah, I believe I can answer that one.

"Monks take a lot and give a little."

[SorO_Lost]

So, if we're going to bash monks, I'd rather see people tell me how a monk fails to integrate with party tactics.

The only role I can see them as is basically a more versatile Fighter. Whereas the Fighter gets a dozen generic feats and half of which are crap simply because there isn't that many decent Fighter Bonus feats. The Monk picks up Total-Concealment (technically better than superior invisibility), Blink, Unarmed Attack's superior damage and number of attacks shenanigans, enhanced movement, enough bonuses feats to specialize in a combat form while still picking up other noncombat useful feats, and more skill points. Not only can he deal huge amounts of damage though charging (the ONLY role the Barbarian does) for combat, like the Fighter's so called area of focus, but he can operate as a scout. Not a skillmonkey scout, but a scout who traded those extra skill points for survivability.

Like the Rogue is the best skill monkey and has a good option for combat (SA).
The Factotum loses a bit in quantity of skills for quality, doesn't get a good option for combat but gets more versatility (inspiration/really limited spells).
The Bard gets even less skill wise but is the ultimate social expert and gets an even better combat party of a massive party buff (inspire) which puts him on other lists.
Then the Monk weighs in around here, couple of skills, some nice ACFs to replace the need for the rest, gets the best weapon in D&D but requires a bit more effort to bring up to a super deadly level than SA but it can and does surpass SA when you do.

Ultimately though, the Monk is a very selfish class and doesn't toss a bone towards other party members outside of what they can offer outside of skills or focusing on one style of combat and killing stuff (like the rogue/fighter/barbarian/samurai/ninja). While it's at the bottom of the skill guy list, it made it on the list. And while it's not at the top of the damage guy list, it's not on the bottom crying for attention.

[X-Codes]

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

I don't know, but somehow we keep getting back to the point where people saying that the Monk is a better class than the Adept because the dragon doesn't use tactics to counter the Monk's abilities while it can easily counter the Adept's (nevermind that the Dragon doesn't *need* to use tactics to kill a lone monk).  Something like that, anyway.  It's like I've said, I don't really know why they're arguing anymore.

I'm arguing for arguing sake. How could you have not realized that by now? I'm not for Monk is better than the Adapt or vice versa but I always thought using stuff better than you (pokemon/dominated/diplomacy) creatures doesn't do a damn thing to prove your worth. Plus like any spellcaster vs debate, the people on the spellcaster's side tend to be idiots.

Think about it.

• We've had Web as an I win button despite in all likely hood the dragon is all but incapable of failing his save and strength checks against it.
• We've had Scorching Ray, ignoring the possibilities of missing despite Cover (via Web) & Soft Cover (via undead army) which as rules state should form some better form of cover and shooting into melee as an I win button. Not to mention the range being so tiny the dragon can still fly over and eat him anyway. Oh and it only deals 12d6+50% (or 63) on all three successful hits meaning it takes four castings and twelve attack rolls to kill it. Plus you know, it could burn that uber I win Web away when you use it...
• We had pick the most powerful creature in the DMG, then say I'm awesome for picking it on my team when in fact you still fail at life and suck goats for money.
• If the pokemon number one thing wasn't bad enough. They +1ed it to Dominating other PC-leveled people. Which still falls short of just Diplomacy'ing up a posse and still falls under I am so incompetent I am literally dependent on some one else making me look useful.

And what is said about the Monk?

• His 1/day DDoor was bashed because the Adapt can buy an ITEM. Also what's with the Monk owning items, though this is about Class Features.
• You can't charge in a Surprise round of falling on people because I never read what Charging or Battle Jump's rules are.
• The dragon can strafe around in mid air dealing 7d6 damage ever 1d4 rounds praying the Monk has no form of retaliation enough though a form of flight is mandatory for meleers and very plausible for a level 12 character to obtain. Not to mention without Polymorphing into something with wings, the Adapt is SOL too. Right... Pokemon.
• And Crush. Not only does the dragon NEVER use it on the Adapt (it's too busy staring at the wall), but it uses it for auto win on Monks. Even though it  only works if the subject is three or more size categories smaller than the Dragon, which is Huge, which means Medium is two sizes in difference, which means it can't use Crush to beat a Monk anyway. ...And even if the dragon were gargantuan or Monk/Adapt were Small sized at least the Monk sports a 50% chance it misses him (Blink) prior to DDooring out or the same ITEMS the Adapt must use for escaping after he got flattened.

That claim isn't far out in the left field there.

• Regardless of whether or not the dragon makes it's reflex save, it can't leave the web without spending a full round to move.  If it fails it's reflex save, then it can't even spend that action to move, it has to spend more actions to break free first.  In a game of action economy, spending one PC's standard action to waste a round + of actions by your opponent is ridiculously good.  If the Adept is accompanied by a full party, then it pretty much is an I Win button.
• The dragon's touch AC, WITH cover, is 12.  With most dragons, it's not going to get much higher than that.  From BAB alone, the Adept is going to get a +6 bonus to hit with his rays, translating into a 75% chance to hit the dragon with a given ray.  With modest modifiers like +2 from Dex, +1 from Bless (or any Morale effect, Heroes' Feast works), maybe another +2 from Recitation... It's not hard for the Adept to get to a 95% hit rate, even if the Dragon picks up a weak deflection bonus to AC.  As for the damage, the Scorching Ray isn't the only source of damage here.  Also, for the last time, it doesn't burn a Web spell.  The spell affects a single target, nothing inbetween the caster and the target, and it doesn't set things on fire (it's got an instantaneous duration).  Saying it burns the web spell is making new rules to hose the adept.
• I have no fucking clue what your third point means.  You suck goats for money?  I know some people who would pay to see that.
• The "pokemon" thing, as you called it, is a pretty explicit class feature of the Adept.  Also note that we used random encounter generators to come up with 9-headed zombie hydras (afterall, if we were just picking the best shit out of the book we'd have picked 10-headed zombie hydras).  The Domination thing mostly shows the power of the Mother Cyst feat when applied to a low-rank Spellcaster more than anything else.  That said, it is still something the Monk just can't do.
• No, his 1/day DDoor was bashed because it barely does shit.  The best use of this ability is for the monk to RUN THE FUCK AWAY.
• Saying that you get a charge when you fall on someone because you have Battle Jump is high TO requiring a very particular reading of the rules, and at the very least speaks more to the strength of the Battle Jump feat than the strength of the Monk.
• This is where the effective range argument comes in.  The Monk has an effective range of shit, so he not only has to be able to fly, he has to be able to catch the dragon.  Here's a hint: there's no way in hell the Monk is catching the Dragon.  The Adept's effective range is 55', compared to the dragon's 50'.  Therefore, the Adept doesn't have to catch the Dragon, he just has to wait for it to get in range.  Also, the Adept has the Resist Energy spell on his list.  In order to do any damage at all with his breath weapon, the dragon has to roll quite a bit over the average for his breath weapon, AND the Adept has to fail his save (unlikely, true, but not significantly more unlikely than the Dragon rolling enough damage to bypass this defense).
• Everyone needs to pull their head out of their asses on this one.  Grappling is TERRIBLE, it just doesn't matter at all what form it's in.  Crush attacks suck, Snatch sucks, and trying to grapple the Dragon sucks.  Whoever thinks that they can beat the dragon or that the dragon can beat something else by grappling, no matter how special of a way you do it, simply isn't remembering the fact that we're talking about grappling here.

I will never understand these threads.  A monk can be incredible when you factor in party-supplied support buffs and tactics.  The key is the number of attacks a monk can accumulate, and if optimized correctly, how much damage those attacks deal.  Who gives a flying fuck about one on one duels?

The problem is that the monk is basically ENTIRELY reliant on party buffs and items. It's the same problem with the fighter, but to a larger degree.

My point is that this is not even a problem to begin with.  The fact that it's perceived as a problem is a symptom of the artificial environment in which most C.O. is performed.  That is to say that a lot of builds try to cover as many possible scenarios by themselves as possible.  Maybe it's because I DM more often than I get to play, but I have long since become jaded against the idea that every character in the party needs to be some kind of rockstar one-man-band.  I find things go much more interestingly if players have synergistic tactics.  I should clarify that buzzword "synergistic", though.

I do not mean:
1. The party has a very optimized specialist for each area of commonly encountered problems.  Together the party usually has someone who can save the day single-handedly.  This type of party usually sucks because then the DM feels obliged to dish out "spotlight" encounters for each player to highlight their individual specialties.
2. The party has some awesome combo that sets up one character for greatness every time.

What I do mean is:
1. The party contains several "awesome" combos that set up various characters for greatness in combat.
2. The party is specialized, but not so completely that the builds are incapable of acting outside their role.  Bonus points if others can aid eachother with their specialties.

So, if we're going to bash monks, I'd rather see people tell me how a monk fails to integrate with party tactics.

Of these 4 instances, the Monk can either be the center of a combo that sets it up for greatness OR it can do some specific shtick that sets up one other character for one relatively specific combo each time.  It lacks the feats and features necessary to go beyond an extremely narrow role, and if it tries to, anyway, then it's liable to fail at even doing this one thing.  That's why it's listed at Tier 5.

[JaronK]

Eh, SorO's just arguing for arguing's sake (his own words).  In other words, just trolling.  No sense debating with that.

Why is it that all the Monk supporters are trolling (SorO), just arguing against non existant arguments (Oslo), or, well, whatever Giacomo's doing? 

JaronK

[ImperatorK]

Troll threads attract trolls?

[JaronK]

XCodes: for single target takedowns, Crush is actually decent, because in a single attack it causes a pin.  And when you've got a huge creature with boosted strength doing it, it's almost an auto success.  Definitely awesome if you have a minion doing that... and other minions who can handle other things (since that takes the crusher out of the fight).

JaronK

[Tleilaxu_Ghola]

Of these 4 instances, the Monk can either be the center of a combo that sets it up for greatness OR it can do some specific shtick that sets up one other character for one relatively specific combo each time.  It lacks the feats and features necessary to go beyond an extremely narrow role, and if it tries to, anyway, then it's liable to fail at even doing this one thing.  That's why it's listed at Tier 5.

Actually that was a trick question on my part, because it's fairly obvious that a monk can integrate with several party combos.  I'm sorry you're too jaded to see that.  Here, let me just toss up a few.  I'm sure I could go on for some time.

Improved Trip + Enlarge Person + Other Melee Classes + Vexing Flanker + Combat Reflexes: Not very inspired, but Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes are free monk feats.  Enlarge person is very easy to get in the party and Vexing flanker costs the monk one non-bonus feat (it's optional).  If you're not fighting a dragon, but say are fighting a number of orcs, tripping can be effective.  Since landing the touch attack is usually easy, there's little functional difference between a fighter and a monk in initiating the attack.  The check to trip is going to be similar for a fighter and a monk.  At any rate, once the trip is made and when your party flanks the now prone dude, the monk will receive +8 to attack and flanking party members at least +6.  The point is that this is a low cost "trick" in which both monk and party can receive combat benefit.  Oh, and it also results in an increase to your beloved "action economy".  The enemy is forced to take a move to escape and doing so provokes AoOs, which the monk can then use to trip the opponent again.

Tumble + Haste + Acrobatic Strike + Power Attack + 2-handed Weapon + Combat Reflexes + Vexing Flanker + Flanking Opponent+Delay Potion + Sanctum Spell + Temporary Potion: This requires 3 feats on the part of the monk which a monk doesn't get for free, but they're hardly over specialized feats, and can be obtained by level 6.  Sanctum spell + Temp potion is a great way for a wizard to supply buffs to a party without losing his own actions during combat.  Suppose our monk wishes to assist a rogue (or other melee) who is in melee range of some opponent.  The monk quaffs his delayed haste potion as a swift action and then catapults off at (by level 12) his 70 foot move speed, tumbling around and through enemies as necessary to reach a flanking position for his friend.  At the end of this acrobatic show he gains a +11 to attack (on top of the normal attack bonus), sacrificing as much as he dares for power attack and gains a 2:1 ratio damage return.  The same action could be also combined with improved trip (if applicable), which would grant an even greater bonus to attack for both him and his rogue friend.  In the end, we've involved at least 3 party members.  One was a buffer, the monk helped his rogue friend a bit, and also managed to deal some damage.  The next round, we're well set up for the full on pain train of a hasted monk.  If you like, you can add the feat Stand Still to a monk's repertoire and, when combined with the residual power attack damage bonus which lasts until your next turn, the DC to resist escaping the monk's presence can be quite high.

Improved Evasion + Trigger Happy Wizard/Psion + Trusty Rogue: It's sort of a theme here that a rogue exists in the party.  Rogues really do best with a melee buddy friend and melee buddy friends do best with a rogue to help.  But anyways, both rogue and monk have access to Improved Evasion by level 10.  At this point the monk and rogue are usually able to frollick amongst the fireballs and other reflex save based effects, which I got to say really takes the pressure off your wizard's tactical repertoire.


The point here is not that a monk is required, simply that it is able to participate in combos which both benefit others and the monk.  I think it's the height of foolishness to say that a monk cannot fill a diverse role nor do I think a monk is doomed to failure on accomplishing a role for which he is optimized.

[weenog]

I like how the monk is assumed to be able to be a similarly effective tripper to a fighter, similarly consistent with evasion as a rogue, accurate enough to use power attack, and/or tough enough to survive getting close on purpose.  This with 3/4 BAB, a mediocre HD, and too much MAD to heavily invest in Str, Dex, or Con.

[X-Codes]

XCodes: for single target takedowns, Crush is actually decent, because in a single attack it causes a pin.  And when you've got a huge creature with boosted strength doing it, it's almost an auto success.  Definitely awesome if you have a minion doing that... and other minions who can handle other things (since that takes the crusher out of the fight).

JaronK

Re-reading Crush, I have to agree, it's actually not horrible.  Even though it uses grapple mechanics later on, initially it doesn't, so even with FoM you're going to be wasting actions to escape if you fail that Reflex save.  In other words, you have to be able to teleport in order to make the Crush action seem wasted (and unless you have unlimited teleportation, it's wasting your teleportation ability).

That said, if the dragon is on it's own and going against a Party, Crush is a really bad idea.  You're spending an action to do minimal damage to one or two targets (they're going to spread out just because of your breath weapon), while the rest of the party is free to beat the crap out of you.

[PhaedrusXY]

I like how the monk is assumed to be able to be a similarly effective tripper to a fighter, similarly consistent with evasion as a rogue, accurate enough to use power attack, and/or tough enough to survive getting close on purpose.  This with 3/4 BAB, a mediocre HD, and too much MAD to heavily invest in Str, Dex, or Con.

Meh, you can dump wisdom and even wear armor on a monk tripper, and not lose out on anything worth crying about. Especially if you can add Shou Disciple levels later. Strength-based monks are interesting.

[Halinn]

So a monk is good because it can provide flanking bonuses and probably won't die to a friendly fire from a blaster wizard? Yeah, that's convincing me that monks are awesome.

[Mixster]

The next round, we're well set up for the full on pain train of a hasted monk.

Wat?

You mean if the monster he's receiving a full attack from doesn't kill him first, right? And then, what is the full on pain train of a hasted monk? Is it particularly better than the full on pain train of a hasted archer bard? Or a hasted Adept Archer? Or a Hasted god damn anything else that can actually deal with threats?