Expert vs Monk Challenge!

[Bauglir]

I don't think he'd be doing significantly worse. He's still got enough ranks in Bluff to get a synergy bonus, and it's literally no harder on his skill points because you "coincidentally" spend exactly the same number of skill points on raising a cross-class skill to its maximum as a class skill (it's just that that maximum is lower). Again, I'm not bothering with any other feats, so bringing them up is a red herring. If you want to Skill Prodigy this, it's harder, because you basically have to give up a level of Sorc casting by giving up one of the prereqs for that whole rite dealie, and you can't catch up for 2 levels past this (at which point Charles can grab some other feat). It's Class X fallacy because I can change the class entirely, and the core schtick here (Diplomacy abuse, with Stealth for survivability) is something Monks do just fine (it's already a class skill). Or, at least, it's a subset of the Class X Fallacy; I can't change it to literally any class (Fighter fails, for instance), but the one in question works just fine.

And for the last time, using your class skills isn't "trying to be an Expert", it's trying to be a dude who uses skills, which happens to be a group that includes the Expert. This is actually one of my main problems with your argument here, and while I'm fully in agreement that the two classes are roughly on the same power level, I'm not trying to prove that right now. I'm trying to prove that your arguments are fallacious, not that their conclusions are necessarily wrong. I'd prefer it if we made fun of the Monk by pointing out its real failings, instead of making shit up. Being on the same Tier as an NPC class (and below a different one) is embarrassing enough.

[JaronK]

I don't think he'd be doing significantly worse. He's still got enough ranks in Bluff to get a synergy bonus, and it's literally no harder on his skill points because you "coincidentally" spend exactly the same number of skill points on raising a cross-class skill to its maximum as a class skill (it's just that that maximum is lower). Again, I'm not bothering with any other feats, so bringing them up is a red herring.

If you're not bothering with other feats, then pumping your Int and Cha like that means having the absolute worst Monk stats ever, since Monks want Wis, Str, Con, and Dex, whereas this build is all about the Int and Cha.  You're not using ANY Monk abilities at this point.  Furthermore, since Lucid Dreaming is cross class you max out at 6 ranks instead of 13... and you have to lose three skills.  It's going to be a lot harder to move around through dreams and whatever skills you lose will likely have an effect (like losing bonuses to Diplomacy or losing the hiding ability or something).

If you want to Skill Prodigy this, it's harder, because you basically have to give up a level of Sorc casting by giving up one of the prereqs for that whole rite dealie, and you can't catch up for 2 levels past this (at which point Charles can grab some other feat).

Right, it doesn't work well.

It's Class X fallacy because I can change the class entirely, and the core schtick here (Diplomacy abuse, with Stealth for survivability) is something Monks do just fine (it's already a class skill). Or, at least, it's a subset of the Class X Fallacy; I can't change it to literally any class (Fighter fails, for instance), but the one in question works just fine.

No.  The Class X Fallacy doesn't mean someone else can do it at all, it means the class you're talking about is no better than the classes you're comparing it to.  It's not a Class X Fallacy to say that Barbarians are a good class because they can charge and kill things... sure, other classes can charge and kill things, but Pounce makes Barbarians much better at it.  It's not a Class X Fallacy to say that Clerics are better healers than Adepts... sure, Adepts can heal, but Clerics do it much better.

And by the way, a Thug Variant Zhentarium Fighter can do this as well as a Monk can.  4+ Int skills, Diplomacy as a class skill.  Better yet?  They're actually Cha based (to a degree) and don't need Wis or Dex.  So they're actually better at it.

And for the last time, using your class skills isn't "trying to be an Expert", it's trying to be a dude who uses skills, which happens to be a group that includes the Expert.

Fine, trying to be a skillmonkey and failing horribly, is that better?  I mean seriously, if you have to dump all the primary Monk stats to do this, and end up not using any Monk class abilities, doesn't that tell you something?

JaronK

[Lycanthromancer]

Actually, you have double-indemnity with cross-class skills. 1.) You have to spend 2 skill points per rank, AND your max is half that of class skills.

I dunno why they couldn't have just set max cross class skills as equal to your character level, whereas class skills are character level +3, and left it at that.

[Esgath]

Why hasn't anyone thought to make a monk using Ancestral Relic (Unarmed Strike) or Item Familiar (Unarmed Strike)?

Give it Throwing, Returning, Distance, Morphing, Sizing, Collision...

Turn that flurry of blows into a flurry of throws and be awesome.

I don't think the Item Familiar or Ancestral Relic thing works...

Necklace of Natural Weapons works.

GIFSoup?

Morphing for piercing/slashing/bludgeoning?

[Bauglir]

Actually, you have double-indemnity with cross-class skills. 1.) You have to spend 2 skill points per rank, AND your max is half that of class skills.

I dunno why they couldn't have just set max cross class skills as equal to your character level, whereas class skills are character level +3, and left it at that.

Yes, exactly. Because of that, you end up spending exactly the same number of skill points to reach the maximum you can reach. That maximum is 1/2 the maximum you can reach in a class skill, but because you're spending twice as many skill points... tell me, what does 2*1/2 equal?

[Mixster]

250 GP at level 20 is what percentage of WBL again?

0.033%, actually 0.0328947368% to be exact.

EDIT: I forgot this math question form above as well:

tell me, what does 2*1/2 equal?

1

@JaronKs build.
Wouldn't it be better as an aristocrat? Anyway making Ghandhi is win. Making him control a society through their dreams is even better.

I actually read Sir Giacomos build 3 pages ago. To sum it up, I made a few Haiku:
Going Invisible
Means you always win, hurray!
Bears have no scent.

Fighting a Bulett'
Twenty ways of seeing ya
Probably go-es well

Aboleths do squat
Illusions are no problem
Fishie Fishie Fish.

[JaronK]

@JaronKs build.
Wouldn't it be better as an aristocrat? Anyway making Ghandhi is win. Making him control a society through their dreams is even better.

Aristocrats lack Lucid Dreaming, so it would take an extra feat to do it.  I think they also lack Hide and Move Silently, which I feel helps.  Also, they have fewer skill points to work with.  Plus, I just don't like the idea of an Aristocrat with Vow of Poverty.

JaronK

[Nachofan99]

@JaronKs build.
Wouldn't it be better as an aristocrat? Anyway making Ghandhi is win. Making him control a society through their dreams is even better.

Aristocrats lack Lucid Dreaming, so it would take an extra feat to do it.  I think they also lack Hide and Move Silently, which I feel helps.  Also, they have fewer skill points to work with.  Plus, I just don't like the idea of an Aristocrat with Vow of Poverty.

JaronK

He swears off his inheritence and sees money as the root of all evil!

[Mixster]

@JaronKs build.
Wouldn't it be better as an aristocrat? Anyway making Ghandhi is win. Making him control a society through their dreams is even better.

Aristocrats lack Lucid Dreaming, so it would take an extra feat to do it.  I think they also lack Hide and Move Silently, which I feel helps.  Also, they have fewer skill points to work with.  Plus, I just don't like the idea of an Aristocrat with Vow of Poverty.

JaronK

He swears off his inheritence and sees money as the root of all evil!

Much like Buddha

[Solo]

Ghandi was an expert. He went to law school and everything.

[zugschef]

Finally got around to finalizing my earlier Monk build today.
[...]
While Blinking, Writhe [...], can fly with perfect maneuverability, [...].

why exactly can he fly?

[skydragonknight]

why exactly can he fly?

He threw himself at the ground and missed on a Nat 1.

[ImperatorK]

Finally got around to finalizing my earlier Monk build today.
[...]
While Blinking, Writhe [...], can fly with perfect maneuverability, [...].

why exactly can he fly?

Because, while Blinking, he is incorporeal, I think.

[zugschef]

Because, while Blinking, he is incorporeal, I think.

but only 50% of the time -> move up, fall down, move up, fall down, move up, fall down, etc.

jump DCs should be halved, but that's about it...

[SorO_Lost]

You take only half damage from falling, since you fall only while you are material.

While blinking, you can step through (but not see through) solid objects. For each 5 feet of solid material you walk through, there is a 50% chance that you become material. If this occurs, you are shunted off to the nearest open space and take 1d6 points of damage per 5 feet so traveled. You can move at only three-quarters speed (because movement on the Ethereal Plane is at half speed, and you spend about half your time there and half your time material.)

Since you spend about half your time on the Ethereal Plane, you can see and even attack ethereal creatures. You interact with ethereal creatures roughly the same way you interact with material ones.

An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down. As an incorporeal creature, you can move through solid objects, including living creatures.

Blink lets you walk though creatures since you incorporeal, you can walk though solid objects since you are ethereal, and both those types can freely move in any direction. Like wise the power of Blink is triggered by what is most beneficial to you (you have a 50% chance to phase out per attack, but always remain phased out while in a wall if you make that check).

I've always handled it a bit like Up The Walls. You can move in any direction but unless you end your turn with your foot in a wall (or creature) you fall and the end of your turn.

[snakeman830]

Finally got around to finalizing my earlier Monk build today.
[...]
While Blinking, Writhe [...], can fly with perfect maneuverability, [...].

why exactly can he fly?

Because, while Blinking, he is incorporeal, I think.

Never incorporeal, only ethereal.

[SorO_Lost]

Finally got around to finalizing my earlier Monk build today.
[...]
While Blinking, Writhe [...], can fly with perfect maneuverability, [...].

why exactly can he fly?

Because, while Blinking, he is incorporeal, I think.

Never incorporeal, only ethereal.

Right.

Oh hey, related to that, a minor word correction to my above post.

Blink lets you walk though creatures since you incorporeal insubstantial,

It's less confusing that way since Incorporeal is a mechanical trait.

[Lycanthromancer]

Actually, ethereal creatures are still substantial; they're just on another plane of existence entirely.

[Bauglir]

In my experience, D&D does an incredibly shitty job of differentiating between ethereal, incorporeal, and insubstantial. All of these things tend to get a monster the Incorporeal subtype, even though that doesn't always make sense, and for players the game just goes batshit. What the hell, Gaseous Form?

[snakeman830]

In my experience, D&D does an incredibly shitty job of differentiating between ethereal, incorporeal, and insubstantial. All of these things tend to get a monster the Incorporeal subtype, even though that doesn't always make sense, and for players the game just goes batshit. What the hell, Gaseous Form?

Not at all.  Only Incorporeal creatures EVER have the Incorporeal subtype.  Ethereal and insubstantial creatures do not.

Ethereal creatures are just creatures on the ethereal plane.

Insubstantial is stuff like Gaseous Form

Incorporeal is only those with the incorporeal subtype.

The only reason ANY of this is confusing is because of Ghosts, which are Ethereal Undead that can manifest on the Material as Incorporeal creatures (but are still simultaneously ethereal).  While they are the archtypical Incorporeal Creature, they are also the WORST example of one.