Monk

[superlloyd]

The game keeps telling me really really hard I should respec one companion into Monk!
https://bg3.wiki/wiki/Gloves_of_Soul_Catching

[harken23]

Monk is usually my first character class when playing this sort of game. No least because they generally don't have to deal with a lot of gear and can just go around punching fools. And Way of the Hand is as powerful a fighter as anything in the game.

[dataseer21]

This is interesting. At least for a while it was a popular thought that monk was the weakest class in 5e. Of course I think that was popularized by some people on you tube I think. They have weak damage(still have yet to play this game so maybe they tweaked it. I'm waiting till I have a lot of time off because I think I will get absorbed into the game.) but they have either the best or second best movement(depends on how you count rogue's bonus action dash on a stick.) I worked with it for a while because of my love of spreadsheets. One of the things that makes monk weak though is when you calculate them not using weapons. So if you were to change it so that they would use a monk weapon possibly their damage would get better. The +3 or whatever the max is in this game does a lot.

[Mike Garrison]

Monk is very powerful in BG3 because a) they get a massive number of magic items specially made for them, and b) so many strength elixirs available. Add in some broken game mechanics (like the ... questionable ... interpretation of how Tavern Brawler is supposed to work) and you can build a monk that does huge unarmed damage.

[jonnin]

Monk is strong in bg3 largely due to the buggy interpretation of the tavern brawler feat. Doubled chance to hit from str alone is just crazy with those 27 str potions. That is +16 to hit on a d20. The extra damage is sick too, but hitting every time you don't roll a 1 on pretty much everything is why its so extraordinary.

the old monk stuff was weird to be sure. Like paladins, they had the mentioned vow of poverty and also like paladins could only be human race. The seek out and challenge the other guy .... DM could arrange it, and it was kinda cool (harsh penalty but interesting idea). The AC thing was fixable with gear just like being a wizard -- you had to find or buy a set of ac enhanced clothing or sweet talk your cleric into a magical vestment spell or deal with the ugly rules around dual classing. Like now, they could use a small number of weapons... daggers, staves, ninja weapons if in game (nunchucks and sai and such). Those could hit what your fist could not. But all in all I agree it was nearly unplayable if your DM was not willing to adjust things a bit in your favor. A good DM would let you play it and help you make it work, but like a wizard, the first few levels, few survived those. That vow of poverty on a need gear to function class was just a poor design from the get-go.

clerics were not supposed to shed blood outside of rituals, hence the blunt weapons. Or, like every other rule, it was because GG was on the good stuff. We wouldn't have anything without Gary, and I appreciate him immensely for his tireless efforts and all, but... its a very rare person who can think up this much material without some of it being really messed up, and Gary was not one of those. D&D needed more sanity checks from more people back at 1st ed era, and didn't mature for a very long time because of the one man show problem.

[Mike Garrison]

Publicado originalmente por jonnin:

clerics were not supposed to shed blood, hence the blunt weapons.

Yeah, this appears to be something Gary Gygax came up with from ... somewhere. And it defined the priest/cleric class for 50 years, either because nobody dared to question it or just because the balance between classes worked OK so they left it alone.

[Mike Garrison]

Publicado originalmente por jonnin:

Monk is strong in bg3 largely due to the buggy interpretation of the tavern brawler feat. Doubled chance to hit from str alone is just crazy with those 27 str potions. That is +16 to hit on a d20. The extra damage is sick too, but hitting every time you don't roll a 1 on pretty much everything is why its so extraordinary.

When I made my monk playthrough I used honor rules, did not use tavern brawler, and did not use the strength elixirs, and the class was still pretty decent. Not incredibly OP, but still strong because of all the gear available for monks.

[seeker1]

Publicado originalmente por Mike Garrison:

Yeah, this appears to be something Gary Gygax came up with from ... somewhere. And it defined the priest/cleric class for 50 years, either because nobody dared to question it or just because the balance between classes worked OK so they left it alone.

It's in his notes.

https://odd74.proboards.com/thread/12846/bishop-odo-club

That's pretty well established. Quotes from Gygax on the old ENWorld Q&A:

"Actually the cleric was based losely on Bishop Odo, brother of Duke William of Normandy, the fictitional Friar Tuck, and a religious proscription against the shedding of blood." [17th October, 2007]

"Remember that I modeled the cleric class on Bishop Odo and Friar Tuck.. .both able combatants."

[snip][end]

Read further down and you'll see on the Bayeux Tapestry, Bishop Odo is shown wielding a mace.

Also, Friar Tuck famously fought with either a club, or a quarterstaff.

Gary took the prohibition on clergy "shedding blood" to mean not an oath of nonviolence, but rather that they would only use blunt weapons in battle.

(How often clergy ACTUALLY fought in battle in the Middle Ages ... well, let's put it this way. Rarely. The Knights Templar and other crusader monks were a rare exception.)

[iamcorn]

Yeah but those gloves are so late into the game that you've basically DONE everything there is to do by the time you get them. Especially as they're locked behind one of the hardest fights in the game.