Points Once Again

Gamer is once again concerned about the 25 point limit:

The 25 point-but system seriously penalizes monks, who lose their special abilities when they wear armor and are reliant on their wisdom and dex bonuses for most of their armor class. Unlike wizards, monks must be close to their opponent to make optimum use of their abilities, so they are VERY reliant on their stats. To be allowed ANY kind of feats(ie. combat flexibility) the monk along with any other warrior MUST have strength and intelligence of 13, even assuming a constitution of 8 (-1).

So on a 25 point-buy system, there’s no point in playing a monk, he could never stand toe to toe with a fighter or ranger or cleric or wizard, which is the only way he could make use of techniques like quivering palm of stunning blow.

I see 2 solutions to this:
1.)You raise the point buy system for EVERYONE, including monks to 28 or 32 points, it would still be fair in terms of equality, but the higher stats would make the monk a little more competitive. This would be fair
2.)put the monk on a point-buy system that is 3-5 points higher than any other class, this makes Roleplaying sense because it is assumed that monks will work harder on their bodies than other classes. And therefore would be “better” in terms of stats. This is, IMHO, the fairest solution. Monks cannot wear full plate +2, they cannot use a lot of the special magic items that other classes can.

Wu-Wei Elf
LN Monk
3rd Level

Str: 11 (+0)
Dex: 16 (+3)
Con: 9 (-1)
Int 13 (+1)
Wis: 13 (+1)
Cha: 8 (-1)

attack bonus: +5 (unarmed)
attack bonus: +5 (ranged)
armor class: 14

some of his skills:
balance: 7; escape artist: 6; listen: 7; move silently: 8; tumble: 7;

These are stats that I rolled with a 4d6 for a 3rd edition campaign that is being run at work. But, for the record, this is a 22-point character.

I don’t know… I like him. And I think he can kick booty! 🙂 I’m excited about hitting level 4, and figuring out where to put that bonus point. I’m thinking constitution… hmmm…

Bob McCabe

The 25 point total is directly suggested by the D&D DM’s Guide under “Standard Point Buy”. I’m certain if in the course of a couple of years of playtesting WotC had found that this 25 points somehow unbalanced a class, they would have made allowances for it. However, it doesn’t say “BTW add acouple of point to the poor Monk, he really gets screwed by this method.”.

One of the main goals of 3E D&D was the balancing of all classes’ “power” across the board. Witness the combined experience advancement tables. So, in theory (WotC’s not mine ;-)), a 25 point character of *any* class/race should be more or less “equal” to any other, assuming the proper stats were bought. Either that or you need to complain to WotC that their playtesting was a total failure……

Cord Grimwinder

….Yeah, in a stand up, toe to toe fight the first level Fighter wins, but that’s the wrong way to look at it. This isn’t Mortal Kombat after all. You have to fight your fights based on your strengths.

If you’re a Ranger, get ’em out in the woods where you have the advantage, lead them into that grizzly with the bad hair day. If you’re a Rogue hide in the shadows and cut their throat or set a trap. Use *your* class’ talents, not the other guys.

Judging one class against another by saying that one will club the other to death in a grudge match is a poor argument. A first level Mage that loses to a first level Fighter in a stand up fight isn’t a weaker PC, just a really stupid one for standing there in the first place, if you ask me.

Cord Grimwinder