Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Are Monks underrated?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Valdar Oakensong
Learned Scribe

United Kingdom
159 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  14:19:49  Show Profile Send Valdar Oakensong a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
I have just started playing a Monk in NWN and having never played one before in D+D or RPG formats, I think that the class is excellent. I normally play Rangers so this is making a refreshing change, has anyone else discovered the joy of pummelling Orcs to death with your bare hands and feet. I fell down the stairs and broke a toe last night, so the dexterity modifiers really don't work in real life...Damn

Guns don't kill people, magic missiles do.

Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe

USA
418 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  15:12:51  Show Profile  Visit Capn Charlie's Homepage Send Capn Charlie a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Oh, ever since the advent of 3e I have been itching to play a monk. It is a great character class mechanically, and is ten kinds of open to roleplaying oppurtunities.

However, whenever I do play (instead of DMing) the DM I play under is somewhat averse to monks, for what he even terms as no really good reason, just that they don't "feel like fantasy". Of course, he would still let me play one, but I am sure I would recieve far fewer good RP oppurtunities than if I played a more conventional character.

In the game I run however I hve been introducing monks(something I see as almost a purely 3e addition) with no small amount of glee. I really like the idea of Oghman pugilists and wrestlers(represented by monk levels), Tempusian Brawlers, and the like. I have however been altering the class as I see fit, mostly tinkering with some of the abilitiues and the alignment restriction.

The typical oriental styled martial artist has about as much right to be in the realms as an european styled knight, but the class can be so much more than it is. It is quite limiting to pigeonhole a core class into a single character archetype.

Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary

My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think.

Edited by - Capn Charlie on 07 Jul 2004 17:42:47
Go to Top of Page

Chyron
Learned Scribe

Hong Kong
279 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  16:01:26  Show Profile  Visit Chyron's Homepage Send Chyron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Capn Charlie

...However, whenever I do play (instead of DMing) the DM I play under is somewhat averse to monks, for what he even terms as no really good reason, jsut htat they don't "feel like" fantasy.


If I can play a bit of devilˇ¦s advocate here, I would like to say that I donˇ¦t necessarily disagree with this position. As a DM I find I often have a certain flavor in mind when I set up an adventure in the realms. True the realms is a diverse place, but there are times when certain things (in this case PC classes) can be out of place.

Case in point from my own campaign, one player approached me saying he wanted to play a sailor type character who venerated Selune (a mix of fighter / cleric as he progressed). I allowed this but I had to stress that the campaign was going to see little time on the seas; it deals with mostly overland events. So you can see how a sailor sea-dog type of character might not fit in among desert ruins and the underdark. Now that being said I told him he was still welcome to play that character (which he did) and only time will tell how things go, but it is a strange mix (fish out of water as it were). And ironically it is a monk character that has been selected as the current party leader.

3e now has Soooo many PRCs (let alone classes like monks or ninjas) that it is more than likely that a player can likely choose something which goes against the grain of the DMs overall campaign. Good DMs will find ways to allow players to maximize their fun, but a good player should also be sensitive to the story the DM is trying to build.

A long city campaign is likely to leave druids out in the cold. A full plate bearing paladin (and steed) on an open sea campaign would also be a bit too high and dry as it were. Thus I think it is important for the DM to talk with players about the campaign before it is begun. Give them a small feel of where things might go.

Back to the main topic, I think monks have as much place as any other class. Many of the Lawful based religions in the main realms pantheon have monk orders, so one need not think of them as only ˇ§orientalˇ¨ in scope.

Just My Thoughts
Chyron :)


Edited by - Chyron on 08 Jul 2004 02:17:18
Go to Top of Page

brjr2001
Learned Scribe

106 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  16:34:53  Show Profile  Visit brjr2001's Homepage Send brjr2001 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The pretty much are overrated

on second thought lets not go to candlekeep it is a silly place
Go to Top of Page

Beowulf
Learned Scribe

Canada
322 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  16:48:58  Show Profile  Visit Beowulf's Homepage Send Beowulf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well met!

[/quote]

Many of the Lawful based religions in the main realms pantheon have monk orders, so one need not think of them as only ˇ§orientalˇ¨ in scope.

[/quote]

True, but the thing is that the idea we today have of western monks was imported from the Orient, and not one of them involved martial disciplines.

I personally don't like the class or the way most oriental classes under-play the worth of western martial discipline. The heathen Teutonic martial art of fighting without the benefit of armour for instance was quite evolved, impressing even the greatest armies in the west, and all interweaved with mystical disciplines ... such as the helm of terror (aegishjalm) and such. It invovled alot of psychology and mind games, as well as skill, mobility and grace, as well as strength .... and probably very little real anger and rage as the term "berserker" has come to imply.

King of the Geats

"Ill tempered the wretch, who laughs at everyone. He cannot recognize, as he should, that he is not without faults." the High One, Poetic Edda
Go to Top of Page

Chyron
Learned Scribe

Hong Kong
279 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  17:28:07  Show Profile  Visit Chyron's Homepage Send Chyron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Beowulf

Well met!

True, but the thing is that the idea we today have of western monks was imported from the Orient, and not one of them involved martial disciplines.



But this is due to signifying the class with the name.

The D&D monk class was more based on Shaw cinema than historical accuracy. Monks from the historical ˇ§orientalˇ¨ perspective were not all masters of unarmed combat. In fact, in the scope of Chinese religion, only a small percentage of them had any martial training. Those that did pursue martial disciplines were more akin to the fighter choosing to specialize in a wide variety of what D&D considers exotic weaponry (yet to the orient they were often common items). Thus you could just as easily play a D&D fighter class who is a ˇ§monkˇ¨ˇK.life does not pigeon hole us as the rules do. And a thief or ranger might be a ˇ§monkˇ¨ as well.

The common factors across the East/West cultural boundary were a somewhat solitary pursuit of spiritual life, a pursuit of scholarly knowledge and storing/recording such knowledge, and withdrawal from common social practices resulting in certain taboos (diet, sex, marriage, etc).

I think it is just a feasible to say that many knights and warriors from the crusades could have retired and entered a monastery. Cadfael is a great series from BBC that talks about just such a character. True that the European monks were not known for pursuit of martial studies like some of their oriental counterparts, but again we are talking about the realms where this is not the case. It really just comes down to the name. One good thing about 3e is that it has given us more flexibility in this area than the old rules did.

Just My Thoughts
Chyron :)


Edited by - Chyron on 07 Jul 2004 17:40:59
Go to Top of Page

Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe

USA
418 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  17:55:36  Show Profile  Visit Capn Charlie's Homepage Send Capn Charlie a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Chyron

If I can play a bit of devilˇ¦s advocate here, I would like to say that I donˇ¦t necessarily disagree with this position. As a DM I find I often have a certain flavor in mind when I set up an adventure in the realms. True the realms is a diverse place, but there are times when certain things (in this case PC classes) can be out of place.


And neither did I. I would be hard pressed to work a Samurai into my game, as I have a certain amount of preconceptions of my own about the realms, that while I could change them, it is much easier to work within my view of the realms.

It would be a serious hassle for me to give descriptions as a certain character type would see it, as well as how the rest of the party does, and plan adventures if most of my work on the campaign was done assuming more conventional characters. Oh, I could, but it is much easier to not have such in my opinion, disruptive characters in my game.

But hey, my current group has an ex purple dragon, red wizard of thay, human raised by wild elves, fey'ri, and CG paladin, so I guess I am already taxing my ability to have a cohesie game anyway.


quote:
Originally posted by Chyron

But this is due to signifying the class with the name.

The D&D monk class was more based on Shaw cinema than historical accuracy. ...It really just comes down to the name. One good thing about 3e is that it has given us more flexibility in this area than the old rules did.




I agree. I mean, all the classes come down to such misconceptions. Take the rogue alone, for example, always the class has had a name with a stigma. In 2e they just suggested that good thieves think of themselves as scouts, even though they still had thief printed in big bold letters on their character sheets.

THis is one of the reasons I have begun moving towards naming a character concept, and all the levels that make up the eventual 20 level build being essentially null.(So a "Scout" would have say, 5 levels of ranger, 5 of rogue, and 10 of deepwoods stalker).

Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary

My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think.
Go to Top of Page

Arteris
Learned Scribe

121 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  21:08:30  Show Profile  Visit Arteris's Homepage Send Arteris a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I thuroughly enjoy playing monks. Especially monks of the Shining Hand. THey are my favorite class (along with rogue)
Go to Top of Page

Crust
Learned Scribe

USA
273 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  22:19:28  Show Profile  Visit Crust's Homepage Send Crust a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Books like The Cleric Quintet series, The Yellow Silk, and Dragonwall give DMs plenty of excuses to use monks in an FR campaign.

As DM of my campaign, I must say that the players who have played monks either couldn't protect or heal party members as well as the clerics could, couldn't deal as much damage as the warriors and sorcerers, or weren't as useful as the rogues and wizards.

"That's right, hurl back views that force ye to think by name-calling - 'tis the grand old tradition, let it not down! Anything to keep from having to think, or - Mystra forfend - change thy own views!"

Narnra glowered at her father. "Just how am I to learn how to think? By being taught by you?"

"Some folk in the Realms would give their lives for the chance to learn at my feet," Elminster said mildly. "Several already have."

~from Elminster's Daughter, Ed Greenwood
Go to Top of Page

Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe

USA
418 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2004 :  23:37:53  Show Profile  Visit Capn Charlie's Homepage Send Capn Charlie a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Crust

Books like The Cleric Quintet series, The Yellow Silk, and Dragonwall give DMs plenty of excuses to use monks in an FR campaign.


Their existence in canon FR is not so much the issue many DMs have, I believe, but rather philosophically the presence of them.

quote:
Originally posted by Crust

As DM of my campaign, I must say that the players who have played monks either couldn't protect or heal party members as well as the clerics could, couldn't deal as much damage as the warriors and sorcerers, or weren't as useful as the rogues and wizards.



I should hope they were worse healers than clerics, and couldn't disarm traps and cast spells as well as wizards. WHat a frightening thing that would be if they could fill those roles. But whenever you see a grappler monk sign up for your campaign, it is usually best to mostly scrap any big NPC wizard villains you were planning on using.

Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary

My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think.
Go to Top of Page

Chyron
Learned Scribe

Hong Kong
279 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2004 :  02:35:23  Show Profile  Visit Chyron's Homepage Send Chyron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Crust

As DM of my campaign, I must say that the players who have played monks either couldn't protect or heal party members as well as the clerics could, couldn't deal as much damage as the warriors and sorcerers, or weren't as useful as the rogues and wizards.



You are right Crust, but Capn brings up a good point and you must remember that monks are not supposed to be the best at doing any of ˇĄthoseˇ¦ things. The usefulness of any class is based upon the challenges the DM sets up for the players. If everything is hack and slash, then fighters and clerics will likely rule the day. Or if it is a trap laded dungeon of death, then the thief will dominate (how useful is a fighter or a cleric/wizard with no find traps spell?). But say the party was captured and the fighters and mages lost their weapons and spellbooks. The monk would suddenly become an important figure in such a situation as he does not rely on those ˇ§crutchesˇ¨ if you will. You see it comes down to the situational challenges.

A monk like a druid or samurai or ninja is a specialized class that is more about flavor and role-playing than min-maxing. Monks should be as spiritual as any cleric, as knowledgeable as any wizard (in scholarly terms), and as honorable as a paladin (LG orders). They can make better advisors, diplomats, and mediators as they often wonˇ¦t have a mercenary or political agenda that other classes might.

Just My Thoughts
Chyron :)

Go to Top of Page

Crust
Learned Scribe

USA
273 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2004 :  15:47:42  Show Profile  Visit Crust's Homepage Send Crust a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well said, both of you. I totally agree.

I wouldn't say my games are hack and slash, but I do throw heavy encounters when they happen. You're right, monks are excellent grapplers (I long to try out a monk/reaping mauler PC), and I've seen that in my games. When I set up the party monk for his "moment" in the game, it's a humanoid with a living anatomy, oftentimes several of them, just to let him kick some butt. However, when the dragon decends, or when the lich rises from the tomb, or when the paired iron golems attack, he's a secondary character.

When playing exclusively in Waterdeep, or Suzail, or Selguant, or Westgate, monks, bards, and even druids can excel. My campaign is currently in a wilderness/dungeon setting. No diplomatic prestige classes. Just straight attack bonuses and empowered evocation magic. The cleric throws spellfire. The rogue is also an arcane trickster who recently felled a fully healthy fire giant with a suped-up ranged touch sneak attack. The group is potent, and only a monk with top notch magical equipment will be able to be a noticable benefit to them. The same goes for the druid and the bard classes.

If I were to start a campaign in Waterdeep, then those classes would be worth taking.

"That's right, hurl back views that force ye to think by name-calling - 'tis the grand old tradition, let it not down! Anything to keep from having to think, or - Mystra forfend - change thy own views!"

Narnra glowered at her father. "Just how am I to learn how to think? By being taught by you?"

"Some folk in the Realms would give their lives for the chance to learn at my feet," Elminster said mildly. "Several already have."

~from Elminster's Daughter, Ed Greenwood
Go to Top of Page

Icewolf
Learned Scribe

USA
214 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2004 :  16:17:17  Show Profile  Visit Icewolf's Homepage Send Icewolf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Crust


The group is potent, and only a monk with top notch magical equipment will be able to be a noticable benefit to them. The same goes for the druid and the bard classes.



While I do see your point, there are also special tactics that can be used because of a monk's special abilities. A clever roleplayer never needs to be a secondary character regardless of class.

I guess it just depends on the player and the DM.
Go to Top of Page

brjr2001
Learned Scribe

106 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2004 :  19:53:31  Show Profile  Visit brjr2001's Homepage Send brjr2001 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
yes they are

on second thought lets not go to candlekeep it is a silly place
Go to Top of Page

Urlithani
Acolyte

USA
19 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2004 :  03:12:33  Show Profile  Visit Urlithani's Homepage Send Urlithani a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I like monks, but I consider them underpowered except against wizards.

Clerics and rogues fight just as well, but clerics offer divine spells and healing, while the rogue matches the monk for damage(as long as the rogue can sneak attack) and brings lots and lots of skills to the table.

A monk can't stand up to evenly equipped fighter, barbarian, ranger, or paladin, either. All these classes contribute to parties by being tanks and/or steady damage dealers, as well as filling other roles with skills.

Monks are good if you have a party that covers all the other basic party necessities(healer, tracker, trapfinder, tank, arcane firepower). If there are no wizards around to beat up on, they can be dead weight sometimes. If you couldn't freely multiclass a monk in FR there would be a lot less of them.

I dunno, maybe nobody that I play with can play a monk right.

As for NWN, I love playing monks in them because they run fast(and that makes the tedious parts of the game whiz by), but they are really padded. NWN has a lot of monk only items to level the playing field for them.


Biggest. Selûne. Fanboy. Ever! :)
"The only reward of Virtue is Virtue." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
"The time is always right to do what is right. "
- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Go to Top of Page

Darkheyr
Learned Scribe

264 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2004 :  07:15:57  Show Profile  Visit Darkheyr's Homepage Send Darkheyr a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
But whenever you see a grappler monk sign up for your campaign, it is usually best to mostly scrap any big NPC wizard villains you were planning on using.


That's what spells in the manner of "Let Go Of Me" are designed for, plus a variety of other possibilities *grin*

Monks are nice. And they CAN stand up to any other class, its purely situational. There are so many different ways to build a character you can't really claim one to be weaker than another.

silm.pw - A Neverwinter Nights Persistent World
Go to Top of Page

Icewolf
Learned Scribe

USA
214 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2004 :  10:22:42  Show Profile  Visit Icewolf's Homepage Send Icewolf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Urlithani


A monk can't stand up to evenly equipped fighter, barbarian, ranger, or paladin, either. All these classes contribute to parties by being tanks and/or steady damage dealers, as well as filling other roles with skills.



That may be true at lower levels, but once the monk begins getting his special abilities, he quickly gains even footing, and probably surpassing most fighters or barbarians, and will probably be at least an even match for a Paladin or ranger. A monk not only has 2 AC modifiers (Wis+Dex) But he gets a myriad of different qualities and abilities that allow him to come to at least even footing. Even at first level, a monk can stun her opponent for a round with a single punch. At level 2, the monk is able to deflect arrows. These abilities continue to grow.

It depends on the one playin it ultimately, but I'd be willing to put money on a monk that I play, if pitted against an equal level character.
Go to Top of Page

Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe

USA
418 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2004 :  08:07:59  Show Profile  Visit Capn Charlie's Homepage Send Capn Charlie a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Darkheyr

quote:
But whenever you see a grappler monk sign up for your campaign, it is usually best to mostly scrap any big NPC wizard villains you were planning on using.


That's what spells in the manner of "Let Go Of Me" are designed for, plus a variety of other possibilities *grin*


Yes, but that just cheapens things for me. I build my campaigns by the method of completely disregarding the party. It jsut seems infinitely cheesy to me for the group of villains to be tailored to match and challenge the characters, and is something I attempt to avoid. Sure, sometimes my players mow through the opposition, but it feels so much more real than the wizard just happening to own a major magical item that just happens to counteract the rare character that happnes to be in the party.

Whenver you get in a habit of tailoring your villains to tthe players, it starts you down a slippery slope, that usually ends with the construction of villains with exactly the right abilities that counter the abilities of what is supposed to be a unique character.

I initially started this tactic of adventure creation because I never which players would be showing up that week, or even what time that week we would play, so I had to just have a large area detailed with plenty of adventure hooks dangling about to be taken by whatever group happened to be around then.

Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary

My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think.
Go to Top of Page

Sarta
Senior Scribe

USA
505 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2004 :  10:53:46  Show Profile Send Sarta a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Capn Charlie

Yes, but that just cheapens things for me. I build my campaigns by the method of completely disregarding the party. It jsut seems infinitely cheesy to me for the group of villains to be tailored to match and challenge the characters, and is something I attempt to avoid. Sure, sometimes my players mow through the opposition, but it feels so much more real than the wizard just happening to own a major magical item that just happens to counteract the rare character that happnes to be in the party.


I agree with you. However, a recurring BBEG will adapt to the challenges he is presented. Perhaps next time he deals with the group he memorizes a quickened and stilled dimension door or hires his own grappling monk. While it is cheesy to tailor new encounters to fit the party, it isn't cheesy to have villains learn and adapt.

Sarta
Go to Top of Page

Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe

USA
418 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2004 :  11:19:35  Show Profile  Visit Capn Charlie's Homepage Send Capn Charlie a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Of course, adapt or die. I however am not too often having to worry about recurring villains, as my players tend to hedge out all but the most unlikely methods of my having any of their foes recur.

Due to their nature however, and the natures of their allies, both the characters and any allis they have often always have ways and means prepared for ways to eliminate one another, often resulting in some excellent mexican standoffs between the characters and their employers.

Tons of fun for all involved.

Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary

My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think.
Go to Top of Page

chosenofvelsharoon
Acolyte

USA
27 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2004 :  22:38:30  Show Profile  Visit chosenofvelsharoon's Homepage Send chosenofvelsharoon a Private Message  Reply with Quote
apart from dm's not liking monks for flavor (which i think is unfounded, maybe the name is bad) i think monks aren't balance (underpowerful as opposed to overpowerful). they are a bit more powerful than a fighter at the first couple levels, and around level 16-20 when they get ridiculous supernatural abilitys, but in the middle they aren't good. they have lower base attack bonus (a fighter who uses his bonus feats for two weapon fighting getst the same number of attacks until level 12), their armor class can't improve as much (no magical armor + no enchantments on unarmed attacks), and most of their abilities can be taken with feats.
i've actually taken a fighter and used his feats to emulate a monk, and every level from 5th to 13th, the fighter was the same or better in stats.
~chosen of velsharoon

~chosen of Velsharoon
"and naught shall be left, saved shattered throwns with none to rule them but the dead."
Go to Top of Page

chosenofvelsharoon
Acolyte

USA
27 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2004 :  22:44:56  Show Profile  Visit chosenofvelsharoon's Homepage Send chosenofvelsharoon a Private Message  Reply with Quote
on other classes (such as those in complete warrior):
some of that stuff is there for themes other than mideval fantasy, such as oriental adventures and jungle themes (tarzan anyone).

even so i personally don't like to limit my players. samurai is a bad name for a class in mideval settings, but to me it's much like a non religeous paladin (fighter type, get's smite, ect). our job as dm's is to make our player's happy, and if a stubborn player wants to play a ninja in your viking campaign, let him/her use the class with a different name, he's a nightranger or some other thing, that happens to have the same abilities as a ninja.

~chosen of velsharoon

~chosen of Velsharoon
"and naught shall be left, saved shattered throwns with none to rule them but the dead."
Go to Top of Page

Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe

Singapore
408 Posts

Posted - 11 Jul 2004 :  14:50:46  Show Profile Send Derulbaskul a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Crust(snip) When playing exclusively in Waterdeep, or Suzail, or Selguant, or Westgate, monks, bards, and even druids can excel. (snip) The same goes for the druid and the bard classes. (snip)


Wow, my experience with the druid in two campaigns that are just about to hit Epic level is quite the opposite: they are really, really powerful.

They have heavy evocation magic that is as good as a wizard's, their healing is nearly as good as a cleric's, the flexibility of summon nature's ally cannot be underestimated (an air elemental whirlwind can be a fearsome thing) and when they run out of spells a dire ape with the rend ability is not to be sniffed at (particularly if he has also used animal growth and a few other buffs before changing form).

Anywa, of course YMMV, but my experience with druids is that they are at least as powerful, if not more powerful, than clerics. However, I have to agree that both monks and bards are definitely sub-optimal choices in most campaigns.

Cheers
D

NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here.
Go to Top of Page

Darkheyr
Learned Scribe

264 Posts

Posted - 13 Jul 2004 :  06:49:42  Show Profile  Visit Darkheyr's Homepage Send Darkheyr a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Now what makes you think I tailor my villains to my players?

I am building my NPC's the same way I would build my own characters. And in my opinion, a wizard should always have some form of defense against grappling or similar attacks.

silm.pw - A Neverwinter Nights Persistent World
Go to Top of Page

Beowulf
Learned Scribe

Canada
322 Posts

Posted - 13 Jul 2004 :  16:28:19  Show Profile  Visit Beowulf's Homepage Send Beowulf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Derulbaskul





Wow, my experience with the druid in two campaigns that are just about to hit Epic level is quite the opposite: they are really, really powerful.

[/quote]

Likewise, in my current intermediate (2nd ed) campaign even a low level bard is being found to be of great use ... and happens to be whooping a bit of fanny to boot! Now, this is mostly due to the nature of the events, in which certain songs open locks or doors, or set statues to talking or riddling or song-playing, and there is a great need for someone who understands both traditional metaphor and musical theory in order to figure out what, exactly, is being relayed.

I think that, like others have said, alot depends upon the situation. And of course, while being a "specialist" has it's advantages, the generalist tends to be more versatile and at any given moment has a greater array of skills to draw on.

"Ill tempered the wretch, who laughs at everyone. He cannot recognize, as he should, that he is not without faults." the High One, Poetic Edda
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000