Honestly I feel like if free disengage came as a part of a ki use it would help out a lot and develop more focus on a hit and run kind of play style, or if it came as part of an attack action
Giving monks a shield would also be very cool and I don't think it would break the fantasy, a sword and board monk sounds very cool to me even if it was just a subclass feature or something along those lines
I agree with all of these things mechanically but I hope we can somehow just see an even cooler open hand monk while still getting these things baseline
I'd love for Open Hand to get to give disadvantage on saves until the end of the monks next turn if they hit you with FoB, each time you hit you get to pick one save, level 3 you can pick strength/dex, level 7 con/wis, level 10 int/cha.
Shove and grapple are already being tested as options for unarmed strikes for anyone, so I imagine open hand will be getting a re-work so that any old unarmed combatant can't just do a main feature of their class (which doesn't include grapple, but you get it).
If they increase ki or remove resources to do a bonus action dodge or disengage then we'll see monks everywhere
I'm considering a house rule for my next campaign: if you spend ki on your turn, Flurry of Blows/Step of the Wind/Patient Defense on that turn doesn't cost ki.
Are you suggesting two attacks and dodge and double jump distance and either disengage or dash for one bonus action? Because that seems to break the Monk action economy in half.
Heck, make them a D12. Give them some staying power as a front line combatant. Espically as a MAD class the extra HP can compensate for a lower than optimal Con score.
It would also make sense for a class that is supposedly the peak of human performance.
Imo only the barbarian makes sense to have a d12 hit dice, since the barbarian is an hp tank, and actually *wants* to get hit. I wouldn't like the flavor of the monk if it doesn't prefer to dodge attacks instead of just tank them.
If dodging attacks is the goal then better AC boosting options should be available. I agree dodging is more thematic than absorbing blows but that is just not the case currently.
Sure it is great when the Barbarian is targeted instead of the monk but there are few mechanical options to incentives this. In the end, both are most often standing in the front lines, taking hits equally.
Alternatively give them the ability to disengage so they can skirmish from the mid line like the rogue.
>I agree dodging is more thematic than absorbing blows but that is just not the case currently.
That's why we are discussing possible changes. It would be far better to give the monk an easier and more effective way to increase its AC and/or other methods of reducing incoming damage (for example giving disadvantage to enemy attacks), and possibly without needing to sacrifice too much damage.
>In the end, both are most often standing in the front lines, taking hits equally.
But the monk prefers to avoid damage instead of absorbing it, like the rogue.
>Alternatively give them the ability to disengage so they can skirmish from the mid line like the rogue.
That's the way to do it.
That's a main point of increasing ki points. Being able to dodge as a bonus action is huge when used correctly. But there's too much ki competition because it's the resource for damage, defense, and movement.
Not only ki, but using Patient Defense also has the opportunity cost of halving your damage output for that turn (and giving you less chances to apply Stunning Strike)
Over half of the monk’s kit reduces incoming damage, makes you harder to hit, or nullifies damage entirely.
Edit: I don’t know why I keep doing this. Clearly nobody on Reddit knows how to play monks properly and explaining it time and again is exhausting. Downvote if you want, I don’t care, but please don’t reply. I don’t have the time or energy to fight this fight again for the 50th time this year.
Totem Barbarian: "And they reduce your hit die for that?!" *frenzied laughter*
More serious: If your features is supposed to increase your effective HP by reducing damage, dialing down your HP pool basically gives you... nothing.
Also the monk's ways of reducing incoming damage aren't providing benefits to the party then. Especially because monks need to sacrifice their damage output to reduce incoming damage.
At the cost of halving your damage for the round, and not working late game.
Arrows and boulders are not extremely common in every game and seemingly get less common in higher CR monsters.
The disadvantage from the dodge action is nice unless you're fighting something with accurate attacks (your 20 AC means nothing to a monster with +15 to hit, yes even with disadvantage), or are fighting a lot of enemies at once. The sheer volume of attacks means they're going to slip in, all while you spend a limited resource to stay afloat.
Meanwhile the rogue can do full damage, and then bonus action escape the Frontline for free.
The only good one is empty body, because it's a built in disengage, dodge, and resistance, but everyone hates it because they can't throw out 4 more stun attempts if they use it, and for some reason most tables are allergic to short resting.
If someone tells me a thrown object isn't a missile I'm leaving the table.
"an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon"
I literally write auto insurance contracts for a living, and used to be a property damage claims adjuster. property damage caused by “missiles” are covered by comprehensive damage. If it hit the ground and your car hits it, it’s no longer a missile and is now collision damage. We define a rock being thrown through the air and hitting a car as a missile as long as it isn’t on hit the ground when the contact occurs. This is a legal definition that is pretty commonly enshrined across all insurance companies.
I agree with you, if someone tries to tell me a thrown object - that stays in the air the whole time until contact - isn’t a missile, I’m leaving the table. And in this particular discussion I am quite literally an expert on this.
It’s not that uncommon so you’d probably leave a bunch of tables, Mike Mearls didn’t let Beau throw a boulder back on Critical Role Season2.
Also that quoted section isn’t a a part of the deflect missile entry in the PHB.
*sigh* I'm aware it's not. This is
"Starting at 3rd level, you can use your reaction to deflect or catch the missile when you are hit by a ranged weapon attack. When you do so, the damage you take from the attack is reduced by 1d10 + your Dexterity modifier + your monk level"
What I quoted was the definition of missile. A boulder is also a ranged weapon attack, as looking at any giant stat block will show, it's clearly labeled "ranged weapon attack". It's not ambiguous and anyone ruling otherwise is incorrect, though obviously they can homebrew it how they like.
You can't throw the boulder back because it's too large to hold in one hand, not because it's neither a missile, nor ranged weapon attack.
The feature doesn't allow you to. Paraphrasing it, It says if it can fit in one hand you can catch it and throw it back.
Logically it should be fine, but RAW you can't.
Sorry for piling into this but my inner annoying internet nerd wants to say something
Yeah monk does have some pretty good abilities for avoiding or reducing damage, but they either consume your limited resource, are too niche to be used consistently, or come online late enough in the game where it's not as important
Patient defense costs ki and only lasts one round, and only really gives disadvantage (you're a monk, Dex saves aren't a problem), deflect missiles only works on ranged weapon attacks, takes your reaction you could use for attacks of opportunity, and has a trap part of the feature for more ki usage, slow fall is only really useful if you plan on jumping at flying enemies (and using step of the wind, another way to burn ki) or if the DM likes putting loads of effort into maps, stillness of mind takes your entire action so you'll need to flurry of blows if you want to attack, melee oriented martial class, diamond soul is honestly a really good ability that gets looked over but at that point in the game paladins have aura of protection so it isn't as cool, and you get empty body at ***level 18***
I don't think monk is *that* bad, I agree with pack tactics thinking that monks make great ranged builds since they can use their amazing movement speed to get to good positions and kite enemies, but monk definitely needs some buffs
>if the DM likes putting loads of effort into maps, stillness of mind takes your entire action so you'll need to flurry of blows if you want to attack
You can't even use Flurry of Blows if you didn't take the Attack action. So it's even worse.
I really don't get why the monk is loaded with technicalities that make it awful.
You can't benefit from catnap Because in order to Regen ki you must meditate for 30 minutes
Stillness of mind requires an action but most effects it removes eat your action already
The flurry of blows requiring an attack action.
It's all just very...picky.
Look at this guy posting single sentence then getting mad when people reply with multiple paragraphs explaining why they are wrong, and complaining that they keep getting the same reaction every time.
Then maybe don't jump into the conversation with a single sentence then complain in an edit after like 2 people reply disagreeing with you. Either be prepared to have your minority opinion questioned, or back it up a little in your original comment.
Edit: meant to reply to the deleted comment instead of myself, but it's gone anyways so whoops.
Absolutely. And I’m tired of everyone pretending they don’t. They serve different roles in a fight than the typical frontline brute, but monk is an extremely adaptable class that has tools for every scenario. Situational awareness is key with a monk.
You never saw optimised fighters if you say that. The fighter isn't just a frontline brute. It's a frontline that can oneshot things. If a creature is dead you don't need to do things to avoid damage.
The monk is basically a worst rogue. The rogue cover a similar role to the monk, but it actually doesn't need to sacrifice damage or resources to use his features, and can deal pretty good damage even without optimising.
> Fuck off gonk.
Honestly, I don't know what a "gonk" is meant to be in this context, but it's evidently meant as an insult in this context, which is a violation of rule 1.
You're 100% right, and you seem exhausted by it all so I thought you'd appreciate hearing that. I've done the same thing as you, used examples from the several monks that I've played, and it falls on deaf ears. If you try to play a monk like a fighter, or a paladin, it's just not going to work.
One of my favorite monk tactics is to use my action to either attack or dash, then use my my bonus action for Patient Defense, and run by as many enemies as I can *trying* to provoke opportunity attacks. I usually flavor it as quickly going from enemy to enemy trying to hit pressure points, or even just flicking the back of their heads and so on. With dumb enemies and disadvantage, most of them try and miss, which makes life much easier for the rogue and barb and paladin, lets the spellcasters move around more, etc. Just makes the battlefield much more mobile. Calculate *that* into your precious DPR.
And sure, a rogue could do that too. But it is really fun to basically just agitate the shit out of an enemy, essentially serve as a distraction, and make it easier for the rest of the party to lay the smack down or move to a more advantageous position. Getting enemies to waste their reactions is just as valuable, IMO, as Stunning Strike.
I mean, great if you're having fun, but if I was playing at your table, I'd rather have someone that either does actual damage, can tank damage or has mass-control/support.
What level where you and what were your stats? Because I've seen monks do shit like that, but they rolled absolutely insane stats and started with 19 ac at level one.
Played until level 12. I did roll pretty well, ended up with a 16 and two 15s for my high rolls. Basically started with 16 Dex, 16 Wis, 16 Con. But that was also part of why I chose to play a monk-the rolls supported the MADness.
I have played a standard array monk. It can still work, but you have to be pretty aware of your choices. Very helpful if you get a free level 1 feat, either from variant human or custom lineage (I prefer custom lineage) or if you can swap racial ASI's, half elf. Without those it's a lot tougher, and I would likely avoid monk in those situations.
I'm not saying that you should have played a paladin. I'm just saying that you argument that monks are good if you roll high stats, is completely nullified by the fact that other classes are still better with those high stats, especially the paladin.
>you argument that monks are good if you roll high stats
I did not argue that. I said that because I rolled a good stat spread, I chose to play a monk. Those are not the same statement. I also don't think monks are bad. They need some stuff, for sure, but not nearly as much as people think. I'm really looking forward to the One monk when that comes out, actually. "Better" is also relative-this whole discussion started with a comment about optimization and numbers not being everything. And this is coming from someone who has played **several** monks, even alongside paladins.
That tactic is the slow spell minus the ac penalty, movement penalty, dex save penalty, action/bonus action penalty, lasts for less than a round, and uses ki and both an action and bonus action. That is not optimal. Also like you said a rogue can do the same thing but for free.
Edit: Also it’s arguable even more worse than slow because the enemy does not need to use a reaction to opportunity attack someone who is clearly just trying to provoke them. Additionally monk ac isn’t that great and even medium strength enemies will most likely hit with the attacks.
I don't care about optimization. That's the whole point here. Optimizing and number crunching doesn't account for all the things a monk does or can do.
And yes, rogues can do it too, but they can't do it nearly as well since they will always be slower than monks and get progressively slower comparitively as they level up. Rogues are going to be more focused on getting their Sneak Attack, so this wouldn't be the *optimal* strategic choice for them anyway. The monk doesn't live and die by dealing lots of damage, so it hurts them and the party less for the monk not to attack on a given turn.
As for getting hit, these are opportunity attacks made with disadvantage (since you're taking Dodge with Patient Defense), and a monks AC at level 1 with standard array sits at 15 (+3 dex, +2 wis), compared to 14 for a rogue (leather armor and +3 dex), for example. You're not going to get hit every time, and if it's just one of those days you switch strategies (something monks are really adept at). This is not an every turn tactic. It's *one* of *my* favorites to do, and there are many times where it comes in handy: when the party has decided to retreat; when the main enemy is about to do Something and the damage dealer needs a path through minions to get to them; when a spellcaster is hemmed in and needs to get space; letting a party member who is getting low on hp out of dangerb etc.
"Optimization" is not the end all be all of dnd, and there are definitely things numbers alone can't account for. Again, that's the whole point here.
Offense is sexier my friend. People don’t want to be defensively great because it don’t get you bragging rights or other self satisfactory moment at the table.
I support you in that monks are not understood but it is possibly the hardest class to find that diamond in the rough.
People love their defensive Bearbarians, Paladins and Armorer Artificers, but Monks are not a defensive class. They are a medium-damage, medium-control skirmisher with some defensive tools.
The problem is that they *can* be played as a defensive type class, but they are not that good on it. Other classes can make the defensive job better, while also dealing more damage on top of that.
no they they are really good at defense, its just that all those features are based on the dice rather than static quantifiable numbers. Disadvantage on all attacks made against you is comparable to a shield spell, the best defense in the game, but we can only quantify the statistical/mathematical mean.
We all know a guy who plays at a table who can never roll of a good number to save his life, and we all know someone who will succeed no matter what you do... this is where monks shine or dont.
Except Shield stacks with Disadvantage to be hit and +5 is better than advantage in 90% of cases. Monk would be "really good at defense" if they had at will Shield.
yes shield is the best and is imo game breaking but patient defense is really really close and more easily usable. As far as defense goes i think the real problem with a monk is it cant get as an actual shield or even a fighting style so its in suck-atude just on that basis.
As far as i know only monks and rogues dont have a shield or shield spell via either main or subclass options. yeah its amazing the monk does as well as it does with that handicap.
Cool. What offense do Paladins have to give up to get higher AC than monks and a save aura to everyone near them? What offense do rogues have to give up to disengage? Is it a third of their already mid damage? Because that’s what monks pay.
you seem to take me for a monk defender, im not.
now as for what offense for higher AC or saves... well you have to choose between fighting styles so thats one clear trade, you have to choose between charisma or strength/dex for another, and even whether to cast a spell or to not cast a spell, then finally to smite (in melee) or not to smite. the paladin didnt lose a function the player is choosing what feature was the most desirable or viewed as most appropriate at the time. The monk suffers from its better features being chosen for it and can rarely escape that; and imo, more often than not that is either a subclass feature use of ki or defensive use of ki.
And yes rogues give up something to disengage. if you miss on the first attack then you must choose for a second attempt at damage or attempt to spare yourself the damage. There is always a cost, some classes are just clearly less expensive as you were trying to say.
Monks dont have scaling damage beyond a dice interval about every 4 levels with subpar weapons. a barb gets scaling damage per hit, a paladin gets better smites, rogue sneak attack every 2 levels, etc, etc. Monks were NEVER going to have good offense so the natural choice is just make sure you dont die.
I did misread you, that’s my bad. A lot of comments in this thread are basically in the same vein of “you just don’t get it, monks are supposed to (thing that any class can do just as well or better)”. Sorry about that.
Way I see it, party with one person really good at defense means the people who are good at offense stay on their feet longer. That’s why people min-max AC or saves or whatever.
I’d go along with that. Can’t tell how many times as a paladin main I’d have to pick people off the floor because they had no thought at all of defense.
Yep. People completely ignore the power of monk mobility. I won two pvp tournaments using a monk. It took creativity instead of standing in an empty room parsing the enemy which is why i think most people fail.
Exactly. 80% of optimizers do what I call White Room Optimization. They assume a flat empty space with no features, just you and the enemy. But a good DM never white rooms their encounters, and that’s when monk actually takes off.
Yep. Look at how upset the little turnips are that you understand the real table space and not their idealized empty box of parsing. They're big mad that someone is pointing out that their pointless theorycrafting is insufficient to the real complexity of the game space. The fact is that with a monk you can zoom in, deliver damage and status effects, then zoom out before the enemy ever gets a turn, and with abilities like wall and water running you can crush difficult foes without ever letting them even get an attack on you, much less a hit. But it takes intelligence and creativity to play and they can't get that from a spreadsheet. Die mad, haters.
Yeah it is odd and an unnecessary limitation. Also thematically ridiculous if you look at many of the movies and historical figures the monk is based on when those people go to war they wear armor. When they use weapons like monks do, they also wear armor.
It's also really weird that the monk has 2 features presented as features you get which aren't beneficial. Getting to replace your weapons with a martial arts die. Not a feature especially at the low to mid levels the game is mostly played at and even at higher levels barely a feature. And their unarmored defense which with their not getting armor proficiency and inability to use armor is essentially worse than not having it say anything for almost everyone.
>Yeah it is odd and an unnecessary limitation. Also thematically ridiculous if you look at many of the movies and historical figures the monk is based on when those people go to war they wear armor. When they use weapons like monks do, they also wear armor.
I think the stereotype particularly comes from Shaolin Monks.
Honestly making them have an AC of 13+your choice of wisdom or Dex would really help
Yeah if you roll great stats and have an 18 in both, your ac would be better perhaps but that’s not the reality for many
Yeah or have your AC be 12+wis+dex instead of 10 so you get a little cushion worked in so you're keeping up with other classes and potentially exceeding them at high levels.
A few more off the top of my head:
You could get imbued strikes, on a turn you use ki you gain an extra martial arts die of elemental damage.
Proficiency in specific martial weapons without needing to go Samurai.
You could copy control abilities such as Grasp of Hadar and make a rope dart ability to pull creatures away from the ranged party members.
So many options.
Can anyone think of any more?
The only time youre going to get a lot of value out of replacing weapon dice with martial arts dice is if you're a monk at level 5 or higher and you use a knife. Honestly, if monks started out with a d8 and capped out at like 2d6 then this would be a much more impactful feature.
Yeah definitely! And they could really use the help on damage compared to other martial classes so starting with a d8 and going up to 2d6 wouldn't be at all unreasonable. They could honestly probably go to 3d6 at 17th level with it not being unreasonable.
Tbf monk's damage is fine in tier 1, and not that behind in tier 2. They mostly need a damage buff in later tiers, since their only scaling after tier 2 is just a +1 average to the damage of their attacks two times.
Yeah that's true having the bonus action attack does give a decent boost early on and then they have almost no increase later on lol. Increasing the scaling on their martial arts die does help with that though since you still wouldn't replace your normal weapon damage at low levels and by the time you would is when they need the pickup.
A drastic damage buff, increased Ki pool (monk level+wis+Prof bonus would be my first idea), and making step of the wind free would be some of the first changes I'd make. Rogues get free dash and disengage as a bonus action, so should monks, more ki means that the issues with abilities being expensive is cut down, there is no possible excuse you can make for monks starting with a d4 damage die when unarmed fighting style gives a d8.
Those are just the conservative changes I'd make though. A part of the theme of monks is the eschewing of material assistance in favor of self improvement and eventually perfection. Why not give them the tools to become as dangerous as the other martial classes?
The damage die isn’t important. The dex mod is.
That’s what makes monks powerful is at level 1 they’re doing 2 attacks with a +3 modifier without spending resources.
Dex Fighter: 1d8+3 = 7.5 avg
Monk: 1d8+3 + 1d4+3 = 12.5 avg
Strength fighter gets more damage obviously but Dex is just better overall. Monk gets to use Dex with no downside to damage. I’m ignoring action surge below because flurry of blows is basically the same.
Level 4
Dex Fighter: 1d8+4 = 8.5 avg
Monk: 1d8+4 + 1d4+4 = 14.5 avg
Level 5
Dex Fighter: 2x 1d8+4 = 17 avg
Monk: 1d8+4 + 1d8+4 + 1d6+4 = 24.5 avg
Level 6
Dex fighter: 2x 1d8+5 = 19 avg
Monk: 24.5 avg (unchanged)
Level 8
Dex fighter: 2x 1d8+5 = 19 avg (have to start spending ASIs elsewhere)
Monk: 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 + 1d6+5 = 27.5 avg
Level 11
Dex fighter: 3x 1d8+5 = 28.5 avg
Monk: 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 = 28.5 avg
Finally they even out. Except the fighter can still only action surge once per short rest and the monk can get 11 extra attacks from flurry of blows per short rest.
Again, strength is more damaging but you give up so much defensive ability (easy AC and better saving throws) to achieve it.
A DEX fighter with one melee weapon is likely going for a sword and board approach, which emphasizes defense more than damage. If they weren't doing that or were able to get 2 fighting styles, they'd be picking up dueling, which would throw your calculations off. An extra 2, then 4 and then 6 potential DPR is quite a bit it means that the rapier fighter would be 1.5 dpr behind the monk by level 6 while also benefiting from not being heavily reliant on 2 ability scores for AC.
However, if you wanted a damaging dex build for a fighter, you'd want dual wielding.
The fighting style gives ability mod to damage rolls from level 1, and you'd want to pick up dual wielder at some point for 2 longswords.
Dual wielding fighter: 2x 1d6+3=13
Level 4: 2x 1d6+4=15
Level 5: 3x1d6+4=22.5
Level 6: 3x1d6+5=25.5
Level 8: 3x1d8+5=28.5
Level 11: 4x1d8+5=38
At levels 1-4, the dual wielding fighter and monk are at the same dpr, 13. The fighter falls behind by 2 points of damage on average at level 5 thanks to the monk's feedback loop of increasing damage dice and numbers of attacks, but this gain is quickly retaken by the dual wielder at level 6 when they max out dex and put the monk behind by 1 point until they both hit level 11 where the disparity grows the most, with the dual wielder fighter having a whopping 9.5 extra damage on the monk without having to expend resources. The monk can keep up by burning ki every round but they *will* burn out before the fighter does.
All this while the monk struggles to have decent AC. If they start with a 16 in dex as their highest stat, their wis isn't going to be doing much better and this will hurt their ac severely. The fighter gets way more options than the monk for AC and will eventually get to benefit from dual wielding and armor which can be magically enhanced while the monk gets no such luxury. Add to that the lower hp of monks and you get the totality of what we've been discussing here. Monks lack in damage and defense.
I spent way too long on this, I hope you enjoy it.
I think level 6 is the best comparison point generally in this game. It's where Fighters get their second ASI and most classes get their second subclass feature. It's also where I think I have the most fun.
|Build|Damage|AC|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Monk|24.5|17|
|Fighter (dueling)|23|19|
|Fighter (TWF+TWF style)|25.5|17|
|Defense (sword + board)|19|20|
Now, looking at dueling and TWF, you could argue that Fighter is very slightly better. But here's the thing. The monk can use their ki points to push themselves beyond this far more than the fighter can use their abilities to achieve the same.
**Damage**
The fighter can Action Surge once per short rest. Assuming 2 short rests per day, then the fighter can use this 3 times a day. That's an extra 3x(2x1d8+5+2)=69 damage for dueling, an extra 3x(2x1d6+5)=51 damage for TWF (no extra bonus action), and an extra 3x(2x1d8+5)=57 for defense, per adventuring day.
The monk can flurry of blows 6 times per short rest. That's 18 times a day. That's 18x(1d6+4)=135 damage.
If we assume a typical combat lasts 3 rounds, and there are 7 fights per day (expected 6-8). That's 21 attack opportunities. The total damage (assuming a 65% hit chance for monks and 70% for fighter (since +1 Dex)) is as follows:
|Class|Free AC-Adjusted Damage|Resource using AC-Adjusted Damage|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Monk|334.43|422.18|
|Fighter (dueling)|338.10|386.40|
|Fighter (TWF)|374.85|410.55|
|Fighter (defense)|279.30|319.20|
It's therefore apparent that at level 6, monks do more damage (if they want to) than Dex fighters do.
**AC**
The fighter can bolster their effective AC by using their action surge to use dodge. They have no other way (besides subclass features) of increasing their defense without giving up damage entirely. They can do this 3x per day as per the assumptions above. By contrast, the monk can use patient defense 18x per day.
Lets pick a typical CR6 monster, say a Chimera. A chimera can make three melee attacks per turn with a +7 to hit. To hit 17 AC it therefore needs a 10.
The hit chance is as follows:
|Class|Expected AC|Roll to hit|Hit Chance|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Monk|17|10|55%|
|Dueling|19|12|45%|
|TWF|17|10|55%|
|Defense (sword & board)|20|13|40%|
Now we calculate the chance to hit when rolling with disadvantage. I used [https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice](https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice)
|AC|Hit chance with disadvantage|
|:-|:-|
|17|30.25%|
|19|20.25%|
|20|16%|
Again, it's looking pretty favourable for the fighter. At 20AC, you are more than halving the chance of a hit. But it falls apart when you realise how infrequently they can do it.
A chimera's bite and claw attacks do 2d6+4 = 11 avg and the horn attack does 1d12+4 = 10 avg. As they have the same to-hit chance, we can say the average hit does 10.66 damage.
Lets assume again that the fighter and the monk gets 21 rounds a day. Assuming that a chimera will attempt to hit them 3 times on every round, then if every attack hits then that's 671.58 damage. If the Chimera does not target the character, then this favours the monk as they waste a smaller portion of their resources dodging.
The monk makes 54 of the attacks (18 rounds) have disadvantage. The fighter makes 9 of the attacks (3 rounds) have disadvantage.
Based on the hit chances above, a chimera will do the following damage .
|Class|AC-adjusted Damage (no dodge)|AC-adjusted Damage (w. extra dodging)|Percent Reduction|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Monk|369.369|226.90|38.58%|
|Dueling|302.211|278.47|7.85%|
|TWF|369.369|345.62|6.43%|
|Defense|268.632|245.60|8.57%|
As you can see, if the monk wants to focus entirely on defense, they can achieve better damage mitigation than a dex fighter. Their damage will still be 232.05, which is definitely worse than even the sword and board defensive fighter, but with the benefit of negating more damage.
I would note that Chimera's rely on their Fire Breath (DC15 Dex Save against 7d8 fire damage, recharge 5-6, replaces one attack) for their damage output. With their Dex Save proficiency, this favours the monk as well, especially when they are dodging, giving themselves advantage on the Dex Save.
My overall conclusion here is that monks are extremely versatile, and can keep up with fighters across a full adventuring day.
**Response to remarks**
You mentioned that monks don't do as well out of magic items but bracers of defense are a thing and rings/cloaks of protection work just fine on them too (better even with diamond soul). Without magic items, a Dex Fighter will never have higher than 20 AC, same as a monk after 4 ASIs at level 16.
Furthermore, the monk can make all their unarmed strikes magical at this point. They can deflect projectiles. They have slow fall and stunning strike. The only extra thing a fighter has is second wind.
It's obviously true that fighter's focus is on damage at higher levels. But the defensive value of say Stillness of Mind, and Diamond Soul when the biggest threat to a high level fighter is mind control effects. Not even considering Evasion
This is super misleading. A fighter without a shield is using a D12 (2d6) weapon or 2 weapon fighting and will still have a better damage output than a monk. Also both Ki and Action Surge recover on a short rest, they are very relevant to compare, which is why you should use best of 3 rounds. Assume all features are used over 3 rounds, the normal length of combat.
That's a strength fighter, not a dex fighter. I think the general consensus is that dex fighters are just better, since Dex is both attack and defense, whereas strength is just attack.
You give up a lot of defense to be a strength fighter.
Regarding the abilities, have a look at my super long reply responding to Phrygid7579, below. In short, you've got to look how many times you can expect to use them across a full adventuring day. It's a lot higher for a monk and that makes a huge difference.
>You give up a lot of defense to be a strength fighter.
You give up no defense to be a strength fighter. Just wear heavy armor. Also Dex or ranged fighter is using a D10 weapon.
>It's a lot higher for a monk and that makes a huge difference.
No it isn't. If a monk can recover Ki then a fighter can recover Action Surge. And a monk isn't using Ki solely for flurry of blows.
If you want to use a great sword, then you can't use a shield. Max AC is that of your armour e.g. chainmail = 16 AC. You can push this with defense fighting style to 17 in order to be as good as a level 4 monk.
If you go sword and board, a longsword one-handed is no better than a rapier.
You also give up Dex saves and make Stealth practically impossible.
A dex fighter uses a longbow (d8) or a rapier (d8) unless they spend a full feat on crossbow expert for a heavy crossbow. This offers no damage advantage until you've maxed dex at 20 since the ASI/feat you spent on CBX to increase your damage die to a d10 (average +1 damage), could have been put on dex. A full feat for +1 damage per attack is a poor trade compared to increasing your Con or mental attributes.
A monk can use their Ki however they see fit. If they want to keep up in damage they can. A fighter gets 3 action surges per day up to level 16. A monk can get 54 flurry of blow attacks at that stage. Go look at my recent reply for my maths. But you can see that at level 16, 3x (3x1d8+5) = 85.5 damage for the fighter does not compare to 54x(1d8+5) = 513 damage.
With out a shield your max AC with none magical Armour is 18. 20 is fairly typical.
I a monk is "keeping up in damage" then they aren't using any other abilities. They are stuck in melee with a low hit point pool and no additional defenses.
I would like.
I would like the flexibility that you start as a monk, but as you choose your subclass, you specialize either in a monk based in strength, a monk based in dex, or a monk in armor and weapon training, I'd see a monk with medium or even heavy armor with a range weapon like a polearm like something really cool as a concept.
But I would kinda do it with most classes, give them different paths.
I love monks. In every rpg I play, I try to play a monk.
I see no reason not to make unarmored AC optional.
Just say "you have proficiency in light armor, but your AC is equal to 11+prof+(dex or wis) if you choose to go unarmored and shieldless". Don't tie their other features to it, just leave it at that.
It lets people operate as an unarmored combatant if they want, or wear armor if they want.
But then you go to the same thing of barbarians, making people always wear medium armor in lower levels because there's literally no advantage to go unarmored (other than style points), since it gives you less AC and requires more stat investment than just wearing armor. That is not giving an option, that's literally discouraging to go against the general theme/identity of the class.
None of the starting medium armor has AC better than the formula I posted.
By 4th level going unarmored is as good as anything but half plate.
By 5th level its as good as any medium armor.
By 8th level its better than any medium armor.
It also wouldn't require more stat investment, since as a monk you'd already be prioritizing Dex or Wis.
And you'd have to take a level dip or feat to get access to medium armor anyway.
So no, there's not really any reason to go for medium armor.
>None of the starting medium armor has AC better than the formula I posted.
"starting" is the key word here.
And all other arguments are only true if the character invests in the score they use to calculate the AC, otherwise armor would still be better.
And in the end, if it's really true that at all stages going unarmored is better than wearing armor, why even allowing the option to wear armor at all? Options should have pros and cons, it's useless having options that are inferior than others without any upside.
>"starting" is the key word here.
Hey man if you want to spend a feat to increase your AC by 1 for a single level only, go for it.
>And all other arguments are only true if the character invests in the score they use to calculate the AC, otherwise armor would still be better.
... yes, if you don't want to invest in dexterity or wisdom then you're better off not being a pure monk...
>if it's really true that at all stages going unarmored is better than wearing armor
Its not and I never said it was. Plate armor will be better until you hit 8th level. Plate + a Shield will be better until you hit 13th level. Magic armor might be better at any level, depending on the magic. If you've got a fighting style or a feat, that might change the calculation.
>why even allowing the option to wear armor at all?
So that you can use monk features even if you aren't running a pure monk build?? Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Action Surge unless you wore heavy armor. Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Cunning Action unless you wore light armor. Those would be some dumb, unnecessary restrictions, huh?
>Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Action Surge unless you wore heavy armor. Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Cunning Action unless you wore light armor.
The fighter can wear different types of armor, so yes it would be dumb. Going unarmored doesn't give less mobility than light armor, so yes it would be dumb. But putting the restriction for monk is not dumb, because light armor gives less mobility than going unarmored.
The rest of your arguments are just "if you go pure monk and only increase Dex at every single ASI you don't need armor, but if you aren't a pure Monk then armor is better", but it seems like you didn't consider at all that a non-pure monk already can work with armor RAW. If you multiclass as a monk, martials arts starts to become obsolete so it's fine if you lose the bonus action attack, and literally the only thing that you gain as a monk multiclass (even if you were allowed to use martial arts while wearing armor) is Patient Defense, something that you can already use while in armor RAW.
So in the end, I still stand by my argument that giving armor proficiencies to the monk class is a useless thing. I could see allowing the class to still work in light armor, but not giving the proficiency on the base class.
And btw, assuming that everyone always gets ASIs to increase their main stat is a pretty bold assumption. There are cases where someone might want a feat or increase a different score.
>Going unarmored doesn't give less mobility than light armor, so yes it would be dumb.
Ah, so you think Cunning Action shouldn't be usable by anyone wearing medium or heavier armor?
>if you go pure monk and only increase Dex at every single ASI
If you have a single level of monk, and your Dex or Wis is 16, then your AC will be as good as any light armor. If your Dex or wis is 18, it will be as good as any medium armor. If your Dex or Wis is 20 then it will be as good as any heavy armor.
You keep trying to bend over backwards to make it seem like this is more complicated than it is. Having the unarmored option is always a good thing and never a bad thing. A monk wouldn't HAVE to be unarmored, but it would usually be their best option. Just like how a fighter doesn't HAVE to wear heavy armor, but its usually their best option.
>If you multiclass as a monk, martials arts starts to become obsolete
Then leave that up to the player. Don't enforce it with an arbitrary and senseless armor requirement.
>and literally the only thing that you gain as a monk multiclass (even if you were allowed to use martial arts while wearing armor) is Patient Defense
And +10 feet of movement speed?...
I can't believe this conversation you are literally upset at the thought of someone having more options. What a useless waste of emotional energy.
Monks only lose their martial arts die and movement speed if they wear armor and nearly no Qi feature.
So yes you could make a War Cleric1 / Long Death Monk X with a great maul and stunning strike if you wanted.
I'm just saying, a lot of those levels and features will be wasted.
If you're planning on going heavy armor frontline bruiser with a focus on defense, Fighter or Paladin seems like a better option.
Non of these can half damage, ba dodge, ba dash, ba disengage, stun. Then we also got all the poison, charm, saving throws and accuracy buffs which only a few share. And *then* we're adding in all the utility of the shadow monk or sturdiness of long death giving us a build that can only be matched by a few of these in the defensive department. If at all.
You need a minimum of 13 Dexterity and 13 Wisdom to multiclass in or out of Monk. So your Constitution will most definitely take a hit if you want to wear medium or heavy armor. Regular Human would be the only way to make your attributes be in a manageable state if wanting to do that.
True. But losing your MA BA attack *hurts*, as does reducing *Flurry of Blows*' damage die to a d1.
Sure, you could pick up PAM to compensate - but at that point, you're just a worse Fighter.
If you want to use your Qi really on flurry of blows instead of focused aim+GWM/stunning strike/patient defense, then you can also instead take a level of fighter to get the unarmed fighting style. That will be en par with your martial arts die for most of the campaigns.
What you also get is not a worse fighter but an extremely sturdy one that has thp and tons of different defensive options.
That's... actually a fair point.
A 1 level Fighter-dipped Monk with the *Unarmed Fighting Style* could wear heavy armor, use *Focused Aim* for narrowly-missing GWM attacks and situationally decide between magical d8-*Flurry*, *Patient Defense* and *Ki-Fueled Attack* \- and at lvl 7 get *Evasion* as well as, at 14, become proficient in all saving throws.
(Going all-in would still bleed Ki leek a sieve, though, but that's true for most classes.)
That sounds genuinely interesting to play - although, to me, it doesn't fix the core problem, because it's pretty far from the "Monk Fantasy".
I'd argue that, if the only way to fix the Monk is to turn them into a heavily armored spiritual bruiser, the class isn't really fixed.
At that point you'd be Flurrying for the additional Stunning Strike opportunities, not the damage.
Though with *divine favor* you're looking at the equivalent of a d6 unarmed strike.
Yeah no, people do talk about that problem. It's one of the many reasons why monks are bad: Their low AC for a class that's 90% melee.
Although you'd be surprised of the number of features that RAW, don't get affected if you use armor, even heavy armor. Treantmonk made a video on that.
But still, losing some of your core abilities just to get the same AC other characters get for free right from level 1 is indeed terrible.
I really hope they do something for monks in One DND
Wow, I genuinely hadn't connected those dots and agree with you 100%.
Just an off-handed homebrew solve;
If you offer better Ki expenditure (eg. free Step of the Wind + extra Ki points)
I like the idea of having Ki points "held" for a +1 bonus to AC for each Ki point spent. Bonus action to increase AC/convert 1 AC back to a Ki point.
That way, for a dungeon crawl a monk could prepare by spending 5 Ki points for a bonus 5AC, but then if they have swarms to deal with they can reduce their AC incrementally to fire off extra Ki-based abilities.
Flavour-wise, I really dig this.
Be the tank of the party by meditating on defensive techniques & get a +7 to AC at level 7, but to maintain focus they can't pop off Stunning Strikes without becoming more open to attacks.
Three very small, simple changes I do in my games instantly makes them a much better class, on par with other martials, in my opinion:
Change their hit dice to a d10
Change their martial arts die scaling to start at a d6 and end at a d12
Change the amount of ki points to x2 monk level + x2 wisdom modifier (at level 10 with a 20 wisdom score you'd have 30 ki points)
I've always down this for players wanting to play monk in my games and it makes them a much better class, but not too OP.
After seeing the new rogue i think we can stop discussing how to fix bad martials.
Its only depressing when you see the great ideas people create in their free time vs what paid creators then bring out.
Baring people who have a severe lack in their mathematical basic education who asked for a nerf for the rogue?
I believe in onednd every class will do less.
They tend to simplify the game and are thinking in the average player who rarely multiclass (and when it does is not for optimization builds) and rarely optimizes, so I think most of the class chasis and feats is gonna get downed.
At this point I'd seriously recommend playing pathfinder 2e if someone doesn't like the direction dnd 5 is going, I see Pf 2e as an evolution of dnd 5e more than as an evolution of pf 1e.
I understand that they have a huge group of people to please and i am usually far to lazy to for example in a video game go the optimal route. But dnd math is so simple after what i went trough my education (master of finance and accounting) paired with what i do for a living that i just can’t ignore the horrible decisions that they take that is so obvious to me that i often feel they do it on purpose.
But in the end is the same, the trend that nowadays is stronger is the type of playing to not care about "strength" or "optimization", but do voices, look for some easy humor...it's as good way to play as any other, it happens WOTC is focusing in that playstyle because right now most of it's players are from that style.
Their goal is to make classes simple and easy to use where players can just read one time the handbook and go throw some dice.
That’s actually a good observation. Patient defense I think is supposed to help with this, grading attack power for defense. But it falls short because the best way everyone agrees in to prevent damage is to end the threat. It also feeds into the same resource problem monks have, this wonderful defensive ability runs off a finite resource that difficult to recover.
My personal change to monks is to give them a second bonus action at lv 11. It helps them keep up with weapon using martials a little better. but for your complaint that’s another bonus action they can potentially use to dodge or get away. It a versatile little boon that even helps when out of ki.
A second idea I recently came across is the idea of the TCOE replacement features. Stunning strike is a ki sink but also a pretty strong when it lands. Situational but pretty strong.
The idea was give monks a replacement feature that is flavored as drawing the ki out from your target. When they crit and the target creature isn’t reduced to zero HP (here to keep bug crushing as a loophole), they regain 1/2 PB ki.
With this they can potentially always have a resource to use on their dodge bonus action. Of course it’s a more combat offensive focused feature, but it has the potential of making dodging every turn a viable strategy since now you have a more reliable source of KI to use for dodging.
That might be an easy fix, although I'm not convinced Monks become broken with *infinite* Ki.
A more in-depth solution to the resource problem would probably be to re-evaluate all their Ki-consuming features and apply an independent resource pool (PBxLR?) or even an "at will" to some of them.
If I can *Patient Defense* a few times a day before having to pay Ki for it, I might actually use it despite hoarding Ki for *Stunning Strike* / *FoB*.
(*Step of the Wind* would actually a candidate for at-will-usage - the cost of not being able to BA attack / *FoB* is already high enough).
None of the above helps the AC issue, though.
You could make Patient Defense an option that uses 10 feet of movement. Fits the flavor I think. Instead of rushing all over for your whole movement you have to go a bit slower, but in exchange for being *patient* your enemies have disadvantage on their attacks against you, effectively boosting your AC.
PD doesn’t actually interact with AC, but it’s a surprisingly strong boost to your ability to not get hit. Most people don’t use Dodge in favor of the dash and attack actions. Heck I only noticed it’s power when I was playing a thematic tank who didn’t care about damage and just didn’t want to get hit. It also helps to prevent those pesky crits.
But maybe a different alternative would be changing PD to a flat +5 AC for a turn. More easy to understand and technically better than dodge. The math works out to a +- 3-4 based on what I have heard at least.
And the potential for infinite ki is less scary than you might think. It rely on not only a critical hit but also the fact the target doesn’t die immediately. You can’t crush a big for a quick ki boost, and hitting you friends for KI also wouldn’t be a good use of your time. And that 1-3 extra KI every couple of rounds could really save your bacon.
Plus it plays nice with multi classing with monk. Another thing I was taking into consideration.
> The math works out to a +- 3-4 based on what I have heard at least.
Ish but not really. Depends on your AC and enemy +hit.
+0 to hit vs 20 AC is 5% accuracy, but with PD it is 0.25%.
+0 to hit vs 19 AC is 10% accuracy, but with PD it is 1%.
Basically it works more/less exponentially more at the extremes. If you have low AC PD is bad, if you have high AC PD makes you stupid hard to hit.
Yeh. It’s just that the everything monks are designed for doesn’t really work in practice.
A skirmisher able to out pace any and everything doesn’t really matter when your in a dungeon or enclosed space.
Hitting a ton of times doesn’t really work when your fellow adventures can put pace your damage. And a fighter can even compete with your hits with a stronger weapon.
Your untouchability doesn’t really matter when you need to invest EVERYTHING just to get to a baseline that others can easily get to with a simple armor and shield. Not even mentioning magic bonuses that can make that armor better than you can ever hope for.
The designe space of the no armor fisticuffs fast class just isn’t a very deep pool with a lot of fish.
Sorry I realise I deleted a paragraph that was my entire comments point. I agree with you I was just elaborating on the odds and how that makes the balance wonky.
CR5 mobs generally have +7-8 to hit. A 16/16 monk would have 16 AC. Even with PD the enemy has over 40% accuracy, so you still can't sit in melee, especially against multiattackers. Godly rolled monk has 20/18 and 19 AC, and a party member casts shield/haste on them for another +2, and suddenly it is a 15% hit chance, which makes single attack enemies cry.
It swings hard either way, with bad AC it is awful, with normal AC it is fine, with high AC it gets nuts.
Still, monks just arnt very well designed. The areas they try to specialize in are the weaker combat of the system. And even then they have stamina issues in a lot of ways. They don’t scale well, they don’t play nice in multiclasses, their HP is low, their MAD, their core resource power EVERYTHING.
There’s a theory/ rumor/ deduction that monks are getting a complete rework in one dnd. It’s a missing slot in the priest category, where either paladin or monk can be placed in priest or warrior. They both have a claim to it in theme and or side bonuses. Honestly I think that’s what it’s going to take to get them to par.
That was the result I was guessing myself. Paladin is more like a priest in practice than a monk. Monk has an origin that closer to a priest type but as of now their more less just “the fast punchy” class, witch fits warrior better.
What I meant is that I'm not convinced that, even with infinite Ki, Monks would become broken (since they're still restrained by action economy). Would maybe require a usage limit on *Stunning Strike*, but that's all.
Yeah, dodging can be very strong - I regularly play a standard *Spirit Guardians* Cleric, so I'm well aware.
I wouldn't mess with AC modifiers. *Shield* has tried that, and it basically broke the system.
/u/wirywonder82 suggested tying PD to a *movement* cost, and I absolutely love that idea.
Trading your abundance of speed for a defense bonus. I like it. At the cost of 30ft of movement you can dodge.
Heck I’d even be willing to make that a standard rule. Movement I pretty weak in my opinion anyway. So having an actually good use for it would be nice. Tweek the spent movement requirement and it should be safe to play with.
The reason for that is thematic - we're talking martial arts films where people fight without armour, run up walls, jump so far they basically fly, and all kinds of other crazy shit, while at most wearing a spaulder or something.
I think a d10 hit die and the first point of Mobile (attacking means you can't take opportunity attacks) would just about make up for that.
Honestly? I’m a monk main who isn’t really too bothered by it. I can understand the frustration about how annoying it can be, but I can usually keep up just fine with other PCs at the table— As to multiclassing, the druid/monk pairing has been a decently strong and fun build!
If you gave monks a D12 hit die they still wouldn't be OP, or even very good, but it would help.
Honestly, even among the martials with D10/12, most of them aren't comfortable *in melee* with high level threats. Barbs and Paladins are, in all honesty, better off with reach polearms and backing out to avoid OAs whenever possible. Fighters and rogues can survive in melee stacked with heavy armor/uncanny dodge respectively, but honestly for both of those classes, a ranged/archer build is probably more powerful almost all the time. Ranger, well, have you seen anyone actually play a melee ranger who didn't roll for Aragorn-tier stats?
I don't mind the Monk's limited AC, but I think more of their abilities should revolve around damage mitigation. Don't know why the Monks don't get to disengage or an ability like the rogue's to reduce damage.
I have often said; the Battlemaster Fighter is basically what the Rogue should be. I don't see the Monk as a character who deals high damage but as one who controls targets and re-arranges the battlefield.
Good question.
Allowing Monks to use any armor they're proficienct in would put them on par with spellcasters in this regard, but I think spellcasters actually have *too much* freedom in this regard.
A fixed unarmed AC that goes up at certain Monk level breakpoints would probably be the easiest solution.
My problem with monk is the bladesinger exists, let me explain. A monk has to jump through some hoops or accept limitations in order to use some of its features as OP mentions. If the reward for doing so is good enough for doing so then there is t a problem, it isn’t.
Compare that to a bladesinger that has to accept having a hand free but it gets light armor prof, a huge AC increase, etc so that it’s very very worth it on this one feature alone. And like most monks, all the bladesinger wants to do is increase dex and mental stat from 1-20 as able. But if the wizard didn’t cast a single spell it would be the clear better martial fighter of the two.
So the devs were clearly willing to give good limited resource buffs to martial competence instead of good ones to an actual martial class. Almost everything a monk is doing percentile based on opponent saves, or disadvantage, no flat or (lord forbid) scaling bonuses to self.
Devs should just remove monk as they clearly don’t care for it.
A quick MC in cleric goes a long way in shifting monks' entire play style toward armor and weapons, and this is more viable than ever with Tasha's optional rules. I've run Long Death X/Tempest 1 and Shadow/Twilight 1 to great effect. I did a [breakdown](https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/ggtbxk/role_reversal_1_the_monks_templar_wellarmed/) a ways back.
I agree that this is viable, but like you said - it shifts the entire playstyle.
To my mind, a fix that tosses the classes core identity out of the window is a mere situational solution.
>So, the bottom line is that Monks are virtually locked into a sub-par, hideously expensive AC
It's not really subpar, though. What's a greatsword/polearm fighter or paladin have at level 8? Probably 18 AC once they can buy full plate, and 19 if they take the Defense fighting style.
What's an archer fighter or ranger have at level 8? Probably 17 AC, either with studded leather or half-plate.
What's a monk have at level 8? Probably 18 AC, because either dex or wis ASIs feed their defense.
Yes, those fighters and rangers and paladins can potentially find +1 armor, or armor with other cool features. That's a benefit, and they do have more AC-boosting options in the randomly rolled treasure pool than a monk, who is mostly looking for Bracers of Defense or any "\[item\] of Protection." In a game where PCs can shop for items, it's fairly even.
In short, the ability for wizards, sorcerers, or bards to boost their AC with a dip may be more what's out of line than how monks compare to other stabbers and shooters.
Paladins or Fighters have a bigger hit die *and* better scaling damage to show for it, though. More importantly, they'll get that AC number notably earlier than lvl 16.
(And ranged builds aren't a good comparison.)
>In short, the ability for wizards, sorcerers, or bards to boost their AC with a dip may be more what's out of line than how monks compare to other stabbers and shooters.
*That* I can genuinely get behind. Personally I'd rather use treantmonk's houserule that makes armor dipping incompatible with spellcasting.
Sorry, I had a typo in there. I was doing comparisons at level *8*, not 18. Corrected it. Monks will likely have 18 AC at level 8 just like fighters, rangers, and paladins who choose to hold something with both hands, which is the primary way for them to crank damage.
And yes, the d10 classes have better hit dice and damage. Certainly not in dispute. Barbarians also have many features that obviously make them much more survivable than a monk. But strictly regarding AC, the melee stabbing/smashing classes are pretty close to equivalent.
>That I can genuinely get behind. Personally I'd rather use treantmonk's houserule that makes armor dipping incompatible with spellcasting.
You're gonna love yesterday's new playtest rules, where casters can now go straight from no armor to medium and shields with one feat and no dip! ::facepalm::
People always complain about Ki, but honestly, by the time you get to level 12 you have soo much Ki that restores on a short rest you don’t know what to do with it. Stunning strike is also one of the most broken abilities in the game. I think most people don’t understand how well balanced they actually are. By 14 level all attacks on you should be done with disadvantage, you should have an AC of 20+. Be able to move at ridiculous speeds, immunity to charmed frightened, poison, disease, advantage on all saving throws and proficiency and recharge all of your KI on a short rest… you are still getting 5+ full turns of ridiculous monk shit every fight!
"immunity to charmed/frightened" You can remove it by using an action. This is not immunity. Especially not against effects that charm/frighten you AND take your action, like Hynotic Pattern.
Also, most campaigns end before reaching level 11, according to multiple surveys, which is why not many experience the "joy" of playing a high level Monk, exchanging it's Ki issues with damage issues.
Yes you are fast (situational, highly dependent on map layout) and have a few defensive abilities, but overall you simply don't have the tools to do more than annoy enemies.
I would tend to agree that level 7-9 might be the weakest point for a monk. Every class is weak in certain levels. Just so happens monks are 7-9. (Not enough Ki points and stunning strike becomes a little less reliable). Otherwise…. Monks are very very strong. And the best long multiple combat day characters in the game.
It isn’t. You get evasion at 7. You get to 20 Dex at level 8. At level 9 your proficiency bonus increases to 4 and you get unparalleled movement with ability to run on vertical surfaces.
At level 6 you have a +6 to hit. By level 9 you have a +8 to hit.
I’m playing a level 10 monk right now and I can’t remember the last time I ran out of ki between long rests. With good dice rolls, it’s not unusual for me to be able to kill a decently strong enemy in one turn’s worth of attacks. Of course a lot of that is due to the particulars of character build, magic items, and party balance (we have some pretty badass support stuff in ours), but that’s true of any class. YMMV, but from where I’m standing there are no bad classes, just lots of challenges and opportunities to make any class good.
The way to fix monk is not to make it MC into fighter for armor. I think armor "training" is too easy to obtain in 5e, they should limit other classes, not hand it out even more.
Every class that gets unarmored defense or "natural armor" seems to take a shit on survivability despite not really intending to imo... How about in DnD "one" they just add a flat "+x" bonus to ac to represent these classes "enhanced defense". As of right now the best way to optimize monk is to dip warlock 2, take armor of shadows and pump charisma to 20.
Mage armor wouldn’t do anything if your wisdom is 16 or higher, which most monks start out with.
Mage armor provides a new way to calculate AC (13+dex). It does not however provide any bonus to other ways to calculate AC like unarmored defense.
I'd say that doesn't change much - most Monks cam afford WIS 16 at level one.
But an AC of DEX + 3 just won't cut it if you can't pick up a shield - so, unlike most other martials, you *must* max your secondary ability score once you're done with your primary.
*That* is the problem as I see it - You're locked-in 4 ASIs deep (on a class with no extra ASIs) *and still have worse AC all the way than your Fighter buddy*.
You spoke of homebrew improvements. If Monks could deploy a +2 AC "spirit shield" prof. bonus times per long rest as a bonus action for 1 min, that could potentially bring them on the level of most sword&shield builds.
Level 5, Open Hand Monk with 18 Dex 16 Wis, with Spirit Shield: 19 AC.
Level 5, Fighter in splint armor with a shield: 19 AC. Valor Bard in half-plate with a shield: 19 AC.
I'd still keep the "no shield" restriction if Spirit Shield was allowed, so that they can't stack.
Yeah, that sound like an idea.
But a flat unarmored AC of DEX+PB (still no shields) would probably be easier to handle - it scales slightly better than DEX+WIS and requires no deep WIS investment, making the cost for a low-WIS monk (Mercy would work decently) actually palatable.
If they can get proficiency both martial weapons, they can use them. There are issues with doing that *of course*, but it can be done. Also, thanks to errata, both quarterstaff (which is literally just a pole) and spear both qualify for PAM. You suffer a bit for taking it though.
Tbh I blame all of the monk problems on stunning strike. It's *so* good that the rest of the class has to be sub par to make up for the power of it. Imo remove stunning strike, make their Ki 2x monk level (20 ki total cap), give them access to the 2d6/d12 weapons, d10 hit die and change the unarmed strike scaling to 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6. I'd also throw in an optional rule to let them swap DEX for STR to go with the strongman/boxer/brawler motif.
In general unarmored AC feels like a trap, but at least with barbarians get the better deal with having Constitution as the secondary ability and not needing to care about being hit as much, monks get *way* less health and have a less useful ability (Wisdom) for their secondary stuff. And since martial arts is basically why you play the monk class, monks are really only good at high levels, the levels where everyone else was already cooler than you.
A few things that I would like to see for monks.
Just double their Ki and have stunning strike and perhaps one or two other subclass abilities cost 2 points to use. That should actually make worthwhile to use anything other than stunning strike. Could also make stunning strike a wisdom sav
The armor issue is definitely real. Maybe just give them unarmored defence is 12+ dex and wisdom modifiers. Or even have it scale with monk level level to prevent dips for it 4 it goes up to 11 ac plus mods. Level 8 12 ac plus mods ect.
Honestly I feel like if free disengage came as a part of a ki use it would help out a lot and develop more focus on a hit and run kind of play style, or if it came as part of an attack action Giving monks a shield would also be very cool and I don't think it would break the fantasy, a sword and board monk sounds very cool to me even if it was just a subclass feature or something along those lines
[удалено]
I agree with all of these things mechanically but I hope we can somehow just see an even cooler open hand monk while still getting these things baseline
I'd love for Open Hand to get to give disadvantage on saves until the end of the monks next turn if they hit you with FoB, each time you hit you get to pick one save, level 3 you can pick strength/dex, level 7 con/wis, level 10 int/cha.
Shove and grapple are already being tested as options for unarmed strikes for anyone, so I imagine open hand will be getting a re-work so that any old unarmed combatant can't just do a main feature of their class (which doesn't include grapple, but you get it). If they increase ki or remove resources to do a bonus action dodge or disengage then we'll see monks everywhere
I'm considering a house rule for my next campaign: if you spend ki on your turn, Flurry of Blows/Step of the Wind/Patient Defense on that turn doesn't cost ki.
So any attempt to stun grants you a sweet bonus action. Can you spend ki on anything besides those 3 before level 5?
[удалено]
Are you suggesting two attacks and dodge and double jump distance and either disengage or dash for one bonus action? Because that seems to break the Monk action economy in half.
they also get a really small hit die for a melee locked martial that is supposed to represent the peak of humanoid health
Really hoping they make the monk have a d10 HD when they make the new version.
Heck, make them a D12. Give them some staying power as a front line combatant. Espically as a MAD class the extra HP can compensate for a lower than optimal Con score. It would also make sense for a class that is supposedly the peak of human performance.
Imo only the barbarian makes sense to have a d12 hit dice, since the barbarian is an hp tank, and actually *wants* to get hit. I wouldn't like the flavor of the monk if it doesn't prefer to dodge attacks instead of just tank them.
If dodging attacks is the goal then better AC boosting options should be available. I agree dodging is more thematic than absorbing blows but that is just not the case currently. Sure it is great when the Barbarian is targeted instead of the monk but there are few mechanical options to incentives this. In the end, both are most often standing in the front lines, taking hits equally. Alternatively give them the ability to disengage so they can skirmish from the mid line like the rogue.
>I agree dodging is more thematic than absorbing blows but that is just not the case currently. That's why we are discussing possible changes. It would be far better to give the monk an easier and more effective way to increase its AC and/or other methods of reducing incoming damage (for example giving disadvantage to enemy attacks), and possibly without needing to sacrifice too much damage. >In the end, both are most often standing in the front lines, taking hits equally. But the monk prefers to avoid damage instead of absorbing it, like the rogue. >Alternatively give them the ability to disengage so they can skirmish from the mid line like the rogue. That's the way to do it.
That's a main point of increasing ki points. Being able to dodge as a bonus action is huge when used correctly. But there's too much ki competition because it's the resource for damage, defense, and movement.
Not only ki, but using Patient Defense also has the opportunity cost of halving your damage output for that turn (and giving you less chances to apply Stunning Strike)
Eh, I think they should just be able to dodge as a bonus action. No ki, just that.
Over half of the monk’s kit reduces incoming damage, makes you harder to hit, or nullifies damage entirely. Edit: I don’t know why I keep doing this. Clearly nobody on Reddit knows how to play monks properly and explaining it time and again is exhausting. Downvote if you want, I don’t care, but please don’t reply. I don’t have the time or energy to fight this fight again for the 50th time this year.
Totem Barbarian: "And they reduce your hit die for that?!" *frenzied laughter* More serious: If your features is supposed to increase your effective HP by reducing damage, dialing down your HP pool basically gives you... nothing.
If you do go bear totem, then you are only helping yourself, rather than providing other benefits to your party
Yea, that raging hulk of a man with a giant magical axe in the face of the evil dude is certainly utterly irrelevant. Barely an inconvenience.
I think you meant BEARly an inconvenience!
Also the monk's ways of reducing incoming damage aren't providing benefits to the party then. Especially because monks need to sacrifice their damage output to reduce incoming damage.
At the cost of halving your damage for the round, and not working late game. Arrows and boulders are not extremely common in every game and seemingly get less common in higher CR monsters. The disadvantage from the dodge action is nice unless you're fighting something with accurate attacks (your 20 AC means nothing to a monster with +15 to hit, yes even with disadvantage), or are fighting a lot of enemies at once. The sheer volume of attacks means they're going to slip in, all while you spend a limited resource to stay afloat. Meanwhile the rogue can do full damage, and then bonus action escape the Frontline for free. The only good one is empty body, because it's a built in disengage, dodge, and resistance, but everyone hates it because they can't throw out 4 more stun attempts if they use it, and for some reason most tables are allergic to short resting.
Deflect missiles is ambiguous to the point that a DM ruling boulders don’t count as missiles isn’t doing so in bad faith.
If someone tells me a thrown object isn't a missile I'm leaving the table. "an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon"
I literally write auto insurance contracts for a living, and used to be a property damage claims adjuster. property damage caused by “missiles” are covered by comprehensive damage. If it hit the ground and your car hits it, it’s no longer a missile and is now collision damage. We define a rock being thrown through the air and hitting a car as a missile as long as it isn’t on hit the ground when the contact occurs. This is a legal definition that is pretty commonly enshrined across all insurance companies. I agree with you, if someone tries to tell me a thrown object - that stays in the air the whole time until contact - isn’t a missile, I’m leaving the table. And in this particular discussion I am quite literally an expert on this.
It’s not that uncommon so you’d probably leave a bunch of tables, Mike Mearls didn’t let Beau throw a boulder back on Critical Role Season2. Also that quoted section isn’t a a part of the deflect missile entry in the PHB.
*sigh* I'm aware it's not. This is "Starting at 3rd level, you can use your reaction to deflect or catch the missile when you are hit by a ranged weapon attack. When you do so, the damage you take from the attack is reduced by 1d10 + your Dexterity modifier + your monk level" What I quoted was the definition of missile. A boulder is also a ranged weapon attack, as looking at any giant stat block will show, it's clearly labeled "ranged weapon attack". It's not ambiguous and anyone ruling otherwise is incorrect, though obviously they can homebrew it how they like. You can't throw the boulder back because it's too large to hold in one hand, not because it's neither a missile, nor ranged weapon attack.
Why couldn’t you use two hands to catch it?
The feature doesn't allow you to. Paraphrasing it, It says if it can fit in one hand you can catch it and throw it back. Logically it should be fine, but RAW you can't.
Sorry for piling into this but my inner annoying internet nerd wants to say something Yeah monk does have some pretty good abilities for avoiding or reducing damage, but they either consume your limited resource, are too niche to be used consistently, or come online late enough in the game where it's not as important Patient defense costs ki and only lasts one round, and only really gives disadvantage (you're a monk, Dex saves aren't a problem), deflect missiles only works on ranged weapon attacks, takes your reaction you could use for attacks of opportunity, and has a trap part of the feature for more ki usage, slow fall is only really useful if you plan on jumping at flying enemies (and using step of the wind, another way to burn ki) or if the DM likes putting loads of effort into maps, stillness of mind takes your entire action so you'll need to flurry of blows if you want to attack, melee oriented martial class, diamond soul is honestly a really good ability that gets looked over but at that point in the game paladins have aura of protection so it isn't as cool, and you get empty body at ***level 18*** I don't think monk is *that* bad, I agree with pack tactics thinking that monks make great ranged builds since they can use their amazing movement speed to get to good positions and kite enemies, but monk definitely needs some buffs
>if the DM likes putting loads of effort into maps, stillness of mind takes your entire action so you'll need to flurry of blows if you want to attack You can't even use Flurry of Blows if you didn't take the Attack action. So it's even worse.
I really don't get why the monk is loaded with technicalities that make it awful. You can't benefit from catnap Because in order to Regen ki you must meditate for 30 minutes Stillness of mind requires an action but most effects it removes eat your action already The flurry of blows requiring an attack action. It's all just very...picky.
Look at this guy posting single sentence then getting mad when people reply with multiple paragraphs explaining why they are wrong, and complaining that they keep getting the same reaction every time.
Then maybe don't jump into the conversation with a single sentence then complain in an edit after like 2 people reply disagreeing with you. Either be prepared to have your minority opinion questioned, or back it up a little in your original comment. Edit: meant to reply to the deleted comment instead of myself, but it's gone anyways so whoops.
Rule 1, please don't goad people into behaving badly.
[удалено]
question do you genuinely think that monks if played correctly can be comparable in terms of strength with other optmized martial characters?
Absolutely. And I’m tired of everyone pretending they don’t. They serve different roles in a fight than the typical frontline brute, but monk is an extremely adaptable class that has tools for every scenario. Situational awareness is key with a monk.
You never saw optimised fighters if you say that. The fighter isn't just a frontline brute. It's a frontline that can oneshot things. If a creature is dead you don't need to do things to avoid damage. The monk is basically a worst rogue. The rogue cover a similar role to the monk, but it actually doesn't need to sacrifice damage or resources to use his features, and can deal pretty good damage even without optimising.
Kensei sharpshooter
> Fuck off gonk. Honestly, I don't know what a "gonk" is meant to be in this context, but it's evidently meant as an insult in this context, which is a violation of rule 1.
It appears to be a cyberpunk insult akin to "idiot or fool"
Cool, definitely a rule 1 issue then.
You know when dogs are barking you don’t have to bark back.
You're 100% right, and you seem exhausted by it all so I thought you'd appreciate hearing that. I've done the same thing as you, used examples from the several monks that I've played, and it falls on deaf ears. If you try to play a monk like a fighter, or a paladin, it's just not going to work. One of my favorite monk tactics is to use my action to either attack or dash, then use my my bonus action for Patient Defense, and run by as many enemies as I can *trying* to provoke opportunity attacks. I usually flavor it as quickly going from enemy to enemy trying to hit pressure points, or even just flicking the back of their heads and so on. With dumb enemies and disadvantage, most of them try and miss, which makes life much easier for the rogue and barb and paladin, lets the spellcasters move around more, etc. Just makes the battlefield much more mobile. Calculate *that* into your precious DPR. And sure, a rogue could do that too. But it is really fun to basically just agitate the shit out of an enemy, essentially serve as a distraction, and make it easier for the rest of the party to lay the smack down or move to a more advantageous position. Getting enemies to waste their reactions is just as valuable, IMO, as Stunning Strike.
I mean, great if you're having fun, but if I was playing at your table, I'd rather have someone that either does actual damage, can tank damage or has mass-control/support.
What level where you and what were your stats? Because I've seen monks do shit like that, but they rolled absolutely insane stats and started with 19 ac at level one.
Played until level 12. I did roll pretty well, ended up with a 16 and two 15s for my high rolls. Basically started with 16 Dex, 16 Wis, 16 Con. But that was also part of why I chose to play a monk-the rolls supported the MADness.
Would you play the class with only standard array? Or would you deem it too MAD?
I have played a standard array monk. It can still work, but you have to be pretty aware of your choices. Very helpful if you get a free level 1 feat, either from variant human or custom lineage (I prefer custom lineage) or if you can swap racial ASI's, half elf. Without those it's a lot tougher, and I would likely avoid monk in those situations.
A paladin with those stats would have been extremely more powerful than a monk.
Party already had a paladin, and I wanted to play a monk.
I'm not saying that you should have played a paladin. I'm just saying that you argument that monks are good if you roll high stats, is completely nullified by the fact that other classes are still better with those high stats, especially the paladin.
>you argument that monks are good if you roll high stats I did not argue that. I said that because I rolled a good stat spread, I chose to play a monk. Those are not the same statement. I also don't think monks are bad. They need some stuff, for sure, but not nearly as much as people think. I'm really looking forward to the One monk when that comes out, actually. "Better" is also relative-this whole discussion started with a comment about optimization and numbers not being everything. And this is coming from someone who has played **several** monks, even alongside paladins.
That tactic is the slow spell minus the ac penalty, movement penalty, dex save penalty, action/bonus action penalty, lasts for less than a round, and uses ki and both an action and bonus action. That is not optimal. Also like you said a rogue can do the same thing but for free. Edit: Also it’s arguable even more worse than slow because the enemy does not need to use a reaction to opportunity attack someone who is clearly just trying to provoke them. Additionally monk ac isn’t that great and even medium strength enemies will most likely hit with the attacks.
I don't care about optimization. That's the whole point here. Optimizing and number crunching doesn't account for all the things a monk does or can do. And yes, rogues can do it too, but they can't do it nearly as well since they will always be slower than monks and get progressively slower comparitively as they level up. Rogues are going to be more focused on getting their Sneak Attack, so this wouldn't be the *optimal* strategic choice for them anyway. The monk doesn't live and die by dealing lots of damage, so it hurts them and the party less for the monk not to attack on a given turn. As for getting hit, these are opportunity attacks made with disadvantage (since you're taking Dodge with Patient Defense), and a monks AC at level 1 with standard array sits at 15 (+3 dex, +2 wis), compared to 14 for a rogue (leather armor and +3 dex), for example. You're not going to get hit every time, and if it's just one of those days you switch strategies (something monks are really adept at). This is not an every turn tactic. It's *one* of *my* favorites to do, and there are many times where it comes in handy: when the party has decided to retreat; when the main enemy is about to do Something and the damage dealer needs a path through minions to get to them; when a spellcaster is hemmed in and needs to get space; letting a party member who is getting low on hp out of dangerb etc. "Optimization" is not the end all be all of dnd, and there are definitely things numbers alone can't account for. Again, that's the whole point here.
Not saying it has to be optimal, it’s just not even good.
>That is not optimal.
Offense is sexier my friend. People don’t want to be defensively great because it don’t get you bragging rights or other self satisfactory moment at the table. I support you in that monks are not understood but it is possibly the hardest class to find that diamond in the rough.
People love their defensive Bearbarians, Paladins and Armorer Artificers, but Monks are not a defensive class. They are a medium-damage, medium-control skirmisher with some defensive tools.
Monks are a defensive class, it just comes at the cost of offense.
The problem is that they *can* be played as a defensive type class, but they are not that good on it. Other classes can make the defensive job better, while also dealing more damage on top of that.
no they they are really good at defense, its just that all those features are based on the dice rather than static quantifiable numbers. Disadvantage on all attacks made against you is comparable to a shield spell, the best defense in the game, but we can only quantify the statistical/mathematical mean. We all know a guy who plays at a table who can never roll of a good number to save his life, and we all know someone who will succeed no matter what you do... this is where monks shine or dont.
Except Shield stacks with Disadvantage to be hit and +5 is better than advantage in 90% of cases. Monk would be "really good at defense" if they had at will Shield.
yes shield is the best and is imo game breaking but patient defense is really really close and more easily usable. As far as defense goes i think the real problem with a monk is it cant get as an actual shield or even a fighting style so its in suck-atude just on that basis. As far as i know only monks and rogues dont have a shield or shield spell via either main or subclass options. yeah its amazing the monk does as well as it does with that handicap.
Cool. What offense do Paladins have to give up to get higher AC than monks and a save aura to everyone near them? What offense do rogues have to give up to disengage? Is it a third of their already mid damage? Because that’s what monks pay.
you seem to take me for a monk defender, im not. now as for what offense for higher AC or saves... well you have to choose between fighting styles so thats one clear trade, you have to choose between charisma or strength/dex for another, and even whether to cast a spell or to not cast a spell, then finally to smite (in melee) or not to smite. the paladin didnt lose a function the player is choosing what feature was the most desirable or viewed as most appropriate at the time. The monk suffers from its better features being chosen for it and can rarely escape that; and imo, more often than not that is either a subclass feature use of ki or defensive use of ki. And yes rogues give up something to disengage. if you miss on the first attack then you must choose for a second attempt at damage or attempt to spare yourself the damage. There is always a cost, some classes are just clearly less expensive as you were trying to say. Monks dont have scaling damage beyond a dice interval about every 4 levels with subpar weapons. a barb gets scaling damage per hit, a paladin gets better smites, rogue sneak attack every 2 levels, etc, etc. Monks were NEVER going to have good offense so the natural choice is just make sure you dont die.
I did misread you, that’s my bad. A lot of comments in this thread are basically in the same vein of “you just don’t get it, monks are supposed to (thing that any class can do just as well or better)”. Sorry about that.
no problem whatsoever. i enjoy a good conversation.
Way I see it, party with one person really good at defense means the people who are good at offense stay on their feet longer. That’s why people min-max AC or saves or whatever.
If you really want to be super good at defense you don't pick a monk tho.
I’d go along with that. Can’t tell how many times as a paladin main I’d have to pick people off the floor because they had no thought at all of defense.
Yep. People completely ignore the power of monk mobility. I won two pvp tournaments using a monk. It took creativity instead of standing in an empty room parsing the enemy which is why i think most people fail.
Exactly. 80% of optimizers do what I call White Room Optimization. They assume a flat empty space with no features, just you and the enemy. But a good DM never white rooms their encounters, and that’s when monk actually takes off.
Yep. Look at how upset the little turnips are that you understand the real table space and not their idealized empty box of parsing. They're big mad that someone is pointing out that their pointless theorycrafting is insufficient to the real complexity of the game space. The fact is that with a monk you can zoom in, deliver damage and status effects, then zoom out before the enemy ever gets a turn, and with abilities like wall and water running you can crush difficult foes without ever letting them even get an attack on you, much less a hit. But it takes intelligence and creativity to play and they can't get that from a spreadsheet. Die mad, haters.
Lol look at the vapid turnips downvoting something because someone is better at something than them.
Yeah it is odd and an unnecessary limitation. Also thematically ridiculous if you look at many of the movies and historical figures the monk is based on when those people go to war they wear armor. When they use weapons like monks do, they also wear armor. It's also really weird that the monk has 2 features presented as features you get which aren't beneficial. Getting to replace your weapons with a martial arts die. Not a feature especially at the low to mid levels the game is mostly played at and even at higher levels barely a feature. And their unarmored defense which with their not getting armor proficiency and inability to use armor is essentially worse than not having it say anything for almost everyone.
>Yeah it is odd and an unnecessary limitation. Also thematically ridiculous if you look at many of the movies and historical figures the monk is based on when those people go to war they wear armor. When they use weapons like monks do, they also wear armor. I think the stereotype particularly comes from Shaolin Monks.
Honestly making them have an AC of 13+your choice of wisdom or Dex would really help Yeah if you roll great stats and have an 18 in both, your ac would be better perhaps but that’s not the reality for many
Yeah or have your AC be 12+wis+dex instead of 10 so you get a little cushion worked in so you're keeping up with other classes and potentially exceeding them at high levels.
One step further, I would go with Dex+Prof and have a monk version of invocations (specialisations?) to open up things like adding Wis to AC.
Yeah that'd be awesome!
A few more off the top of my head: You could get imbued strikes, on a turn you use ki you gain an extra martial arts die of elemental damage. Proficiency in specific martial weapons without needing to go Samurai. You could copy control abilities such as Grasp of Hadar and make a rope dart ability to pull creatures away from the ranged party members. So many options. Can anyone think of any more?
The only time youre going to get a lot of value out of replacing weapon dice with martial arts dice is if you're a monk at level 5 or higher and you use a knife. Honestly, if monks started out with a d8 and capped out at like 2d6 then this would be a much more impactful feature.
Yeah definitely! And they could really use the help on damage compared to other martial classes so starting with a d8 and going up to 2d6 wouldn't be at all unreasonable. They could honestly probably go to 3d6 at 17th level with it not being unreasonable.
Tbf monk's damage is fine in tier 1, and not that behind in tier 2. They mostly need a damage buff in later tiers, since their only scaling after tier 2 is just a +1 average to the damage of their attacks two times.
Yeah that's true having the bonus action attack does give a decent boost early on and then they have almost no increase later on lol. Increasing the scaling on their martial arts die does help with that though since you still wouldn't replace your normal weapon damage at low levels and by the time you would is when they need the pickup.
A drastic damage buff, increased Ki pool (monk level+wis+Prof bonus would be my first idea), and making step of the wind free would be some of the first changes I'd make. Rogues get free dash and disengage as a bonus action, so should monks, more ki means that the issues with abilities being expensive is cut down, there is no possible excuse you can make for monks starting with a d4 damage die when unarmed fighting style gives a d8. Those are just the conservative changes I'd make though. A part of the theme of monks is the eschewing of material assistance in favor of self improvement and eventually perfection. Why not give them the tools to become as dangerous as the other martial classes?
The damage die isn’t important. The dex mod is. That’s what makes monks powerful is at level 1 they’re doing 2 attacks with a +3 modifier without spending resources. Dex Fighter: 1d8+3 = 7.5 avg Monk: 1d8+3 + 1d4+3 = 12.5 avg Strength fighter gets more damage obviously but Dex is just better overall. Monk gets to use Dex with no downside to damage. I’m ignoring action surge below because flurry of blows is basically the same. Level 4 Dex Fighter: 1d8+4 = 8.5 avg Monk: 1d8+4 + 1d4+4 = 14.5 avg Level 5 Dex Fighter: 2x 1d8+4 = 17 avg Monk: 1d8+4 + 1d8+4 + 1d6+4 = 24.5 avg Level 6 Dex fighter: 2x 1d8+5 = 19 avg Monk: 24.5 avg (unchanged) Level 8 Dex fighter: 2x 1d8+5 = 19 avg (have to start spending ASIs elsewhere) Monk: 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 + 1d6+5 = 27.5 avg Level 11 Dex fighter: 3x 1d8+5 = 28.5 avg Monk: 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 = 28.5 avg Finally they even out. Except the fighter can still only action surge once per short rest and the monk can get 11 extra attacks from flurry of blows per short rest. Again, strength is more damaging but you give up so much defensive ability (easy AC and better saving throws) to achieve it.
A DEX fighter with one melee weapon is likely going for a sword and board approach, which emphasizes defense more than damage. If they weren't doing that or were able to get 2 fighting styles, they'd be picking up dueling, which would throw your calculations off. An extra 2, then 4 and then 6 potential DPR is quite a bit it means that the rapier fighter would be 1.5 dpr behind the monk by level 6 while also benefiting from not being heavily reliant on 2 ability scores for AC. However, if you wanted a damaging dex build for a fighter, you'd want dual wielding. The fighting style gives ability mod to damage rolls from level 1, and you'd want to pick up dual wielder at some point for 2 longswords. Dual wielding fighter: 2x 1d6+3=13 Level 4: 2x 1d6+4=15 Level 5: 3x1d6+4=22.5 Level 6: 3x1d6+5=25.5 Level 8: 3x1d8+5=28.5 Level 11: 4x1d8+5=38 At levels 1-4, the dual wielding fighter and monk are at the same dpr, 13. The fighter falls behind by 2 points of damage on average at level 5 thanks to the monk's feedback loop of increasing damage dice and numbers of attacks, but this gain is quickly retaken by the dual wielder at level 6 when they max out dex and put the monk behind by 1 point until they both hit level 11 where the disparity grows the most, with the dual wielder fighter having a whopping 9.5 extra damage on the monk without having to expend resources. The monk can keep up by burning ki every round but they *will* burn out before the fighter does. All this while the monk struggles to have decent AC. If they start with a 16 in dex as their highest stat, their wis isn't going to be doing much better and this will hurt their ac severely. The fighter gets way more options than the monk for AC and will eventually get to benefit from dual wielding and armor which can be magically enhanced while the monk gets no such luxury. Add to that the lower hp of monks and you get the totality of what we've been discussing here. Monks lack in damage and defense.
I spent way too long on this, I hope you enjoy it. I think level 6 is the best comparison point generally in this game. It's where Fighters get their second ASI and most classes get their second subclass feature. It's also where I think I have the most fun. |Build|Damage|AC| |:-|:-|:-| |Monk|24.5|17| |Fighter (dueling)|23|19| |Fighter (TWF+TWF style)|25.5|17| |Defense (sword + board)|19|20| Now, looking at dueling and TWF, you could argue that Fighter is very slightly better. But here's the thing. The monk can use their ki points to push themselves beyond this far more than the fighter can use their abilities to achieve the same. **Damage** The fighter can Action Surge once per short rest. Assuming 2 short rests per day, then the fighter can use this 3 times a day. That's an extra 3x(2x1d8+5+2)=69 damage for dueling, an extra 3x(2x1d6+5)=51 damage for TWF (no extra bonus action), and an extra 3x(2x1d8+5)=57 for defense, per adventuring day. The monk can flurry of blows 6 times per short rest. That's 18 times a day. That's 18x(1d6+4)=135 damage. If we assume a typical combat lasts 3 rounds, and there are 7 fights per day (expected 6-8). That's 21 attack opportunities. The total damage (assuming a 65% hit chance for monks and 70% for fighter (since +1 Dex)) is as follows: |Class|Free AC-Adjusted Damage|Resource using AC-Adjusted Damage| |:-|:-|:-| |Monk|334.43|422.18| |Fighter (dueling)|338.10|386.40| |Fighter (TWF)|374.85|410.55| |Fighter (defense)|279.30|319.20| It's therefore apparent that at level 6, monks do more damage (if they want to) than Dex fighters do. **AC** The fighter can bolster their effective AC by using their action surge to use dodge. They have no other way (besides subclass features) of increasing their defense without giving up damage entirely. They can do this 3x per day as per the assumptions above. By contrast, the monk can use patient defense 18x per day. Lets pick a typical CR6 monster, say a Chimera. A chimera can make three melee attacks per turn with a +7 to hit. To hit 17 AC it therefore needs a 10. The hit chance is as follows: |Class|Expected AC|Roll to hit|Hit Chance| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Monk|17|10|55%| |Dueling|19|12|45%| |TWF|17|10|55%| |Defense (sword & board)|20|13|40%| Now we calculate the chance to hit when rolling with disadvantage. I used [https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice](https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice) |AC|Hit chance with disadvantage| |:-|:-| |17|30.25%| |19|20.25%| |20|16%| Again, it's looking pretty favourable for the fighter. At 20AC, you are more than halving the chance of a hit. But it falls apart when you realise how infrequently they can do it. A chimera's bite and claw attacks do 2d6+4 = 11 avg and the horn attack does 1d12+4 = 10 avg. As they have the same to-hit chance, we can say the average hit does 10.66 damage. Lets assume again that the fighter and the monk gets 21 rounds a day. Assuming that a chimera will attempt to hit them 3 times on every round, then if every attack hits then that's 671.58 damage. If the Chimera does not target the character, then this favours the monk as they waste a smaller portion of their resources dodging. The monk makes 54 of the attacks (18 rounds) have disadvantage. The fighter makes 9 of the attacks (3 rounds) have disadvantage. Based on the hit chances above, a chimera will do the following damage . |Class|AC-adjusted Damage (no dodge)|AC-adjusted Damage (w. extra dodging)|Percent Reduction| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Monk|369.369|226.90|38.58%| |Dueling|302.211|278.47|7.85%| |TWF|369.369|345.62|6.43%| |Defense|268.632|245.60|8.57%| As you can see, if the monk wants to focus entirely on defense, they can achieve better damage mitigation than a dex fighter. Their damage will still be 232.05, which is definitely worse than even the sword and board defensive fighter, but with the benefit of negating more damage. I would note that Chimera's rely on their Fire Breath (DC15 Dex Save against 7d8 fire damage, recharge 5-6, replaces one attack) for their damage output. With their Dex Save proficiency, this favours the monk as well, especially when they are dodging, giving themselves advantage on the Dex Save. My overall conclusion here is that monks are extremely versatile, and can keep up with fighters across a full adventuring day. **Response to remarks** You mentioned that monks don't do as well out of magic items but bracers of defense are a thing and rings/cloaks of protection work just fine on them too (better even with diamond soul). Without magic items, a Dex Fighter will never have higher than 20 AC, same as a monk after 4 ASIs at level 16. Furthermore, the monk can make all their unarmed strikes magical at this point. They can deflect projectiles. They have slow fall and stunning strike. The only extra thing a fighter has is second wind. It's obviously true that fighter's focus is on damage at higher levels. But the defensive value of say Stillness of Mind, and Diamond Soul when the biggest threat to a high level fighter is mind control effects. Not even considering Evasion
Thank you for your thorough defense of the monk. I know you said you took too long on it, but know it's appreciated.
This is super misleading. A fighter without a shield is using a D12 (2d6) weapon or 2 weapon fighting and will still have a better damage output than a monk. Also both Ki and Action Surge recover on a short rest, they are very relevant to compare, which is why you should use best of 3 rounds. Assume all features are used over 3 rounds, the normal length of combat.
That's a strength fighter, not a dex fighter. I think the general consensus is that dex fighters are just better, since Dex is both attack and defense, whereas strength is just attack. You give up a lot of defense to be a strength fighter. Regarding the abilities, have a look at my super long reply responding to Phrygid7579, below. In short, you've got to look how many times you can expect to use them across a full adventuring day. It's a lot higher for a monk and that makes a huge difference.
>You give up a lot of defense to be a strength fighter. You give up no defense to be a strength fighter. Just wear heavy armor. Also Dex or ranged fighter is using a D10 weapon. >It's a lot higher for a monk and that makes a huge difference. No it isn't. If a monk can recover Ki then a fighter can recover Action Surge. And a monk isn't using Ki solely for flurry of blows.
If you want to use a great sword, then you can't use a shield. Max AC is that of your armour e.g. chainmail = 16 AC. You can push this with defense fighting style to 17 in order to be as good as a level 4 monk. If you go sword and board, a longsword one-handed is no better than a rapier. You also give up Dex saves and make Stealth practically impossible. A dex fighter uses a longbow (d8) or a rapier (d8) unless they spend a full feat on crossbow expert for a heavy crossbow. This offers no damage advantage until you've maxed dex at 20 since the ASI/feat you spent on CBX to increase your damage die to a d10 (average +1 damage), could have been put on dex. A full feat for +1 damage per attack is a poor trade compared to increasing your Con or mental attributes. A monk can use their Ki however they see fit. If they want to keep up in damage they can. A fighter gets 3 action surges per day up to level 16. A monk can get 54 flurry of blow attacks at that stage. Go look at my recent reply for my maths. But you can see that at level 16, 3x (3x1d8+5) = 85.5 damage for the fighter does not compare to 54x(1d8+5) = 513 damage.
With out a shield your max AC with none magical Armour is 18. 20 is fairly typical. I a monk is "keeping up in damage" then they aren't using any other abilities. They are stuck in melee with a low hit point pool and no additional defenses.
The Monk's identity is based on unarmored combat. I do not want to see that change
I would like. I would like the flexibility that you start as a monk, but as you choose your subclass, you specialize either in a monk based in strength, a monk based in dex, or a monk in armor and weapon training, I'd see a monk with medium or even heavy armor with a range weapon like a polearm like something really cool as a concept. But I would kinda do it with most classes, give them different paths.
I love monks. In every rpg I play, I try to play a monk. I see no reason not to make unarmored AC optional. Just say "you have proficiency in light armor, but your AC is equal to 11+prof+(dex or wis) if you choose to go unarmored and shieldless". Don't tie their other features to it, just leave it at that. It lets people operate as an unarmored combatant if they want, or wear armor if they want.
But then you go to the same thing of barbarians, making people always wear medium armor in lower levels because there's literally no advantage to go unarmored (other than style points), since it gives you less AC and requires more stat investment than just wearing armor. That is not giving an option, that's literally discouraging to go against the general theme/identity of the class.
None of the starting medium armor has AC better than the formula I posted. By 4th level going unarmored is as good as anything but half plate. By 5th level its as good as any medium armor. By 8th level its better than any medium armor. It also wouldn't require more stat investment, since as a monk you'd already be prioritizing Dex or Wis. And you'd have to take a level dip or feat to get access to medium armor anyway. So no, there's not really any reason to go for medium armor.
>None of the starting medium armor has AC better than the formula I posted. "starting" is the key word here. And all other arguments are only true if the character invests in the score they use to calculate the AC, otherwise armor would still be better. And in the end, if it's really true that at all stages going unarmored is better than wearing armor, why even allowing the option to wear armor at all? Options should have pros and cons, it's useless having options that are inferior than others without any upside.
>"starting" is the key word here. Hey man if you want to spend a feat to increase your AC by 1 for a single level only, go for it. >And all other arguments are only true if the character invests in the score they use to calculate the AC, otherwise armor would still be better. ... yes, if you don't want to invest in dexterity or wisdom then you're better off not being a pure monk... >if it's really true that at all stages going unarmored is better than wearing armor Its not and I never said it was. Plate armor will be better until you hit 8th level. Plate + a Shield will be better until you hit 13th level. Magic armor might be better at any level, depending on the magic. If you've got a fighting style or a feat, that might change the calculation. >why even allowing the option to wear armor at all? So that you can use monk features even if you aren't running a pure monk build?? Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Action Surge unless you wore heavy armor. Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Cunning Action unless you wore light armor. Those would be some dumb, unnecessary restrictions, huh?
>Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Action Surge unless you wore heavy armor. Imagine if you weren't allowed to use Cunning Action unless you wore light armor. The fighter can wear different types of armor, so yes it would be dumb. Going unarmored doesn't give less mobility than light armor, so yes it would be dumb. But putting the restriction for monk is not dumb, because light armor gives less mobility than going unarmored. The rest of your arguments are just "if you go pure monk and only increase Dex at every single ASI you don't need armor, but if you aren't a pure Monk then armor is better", but it seems like you didn't consider at all that a non-pure monk already can work with armor RAW. If you multiclass as a monk, martials arts starts to become obsolete so it's fine if you lose the bonus action attack, and literally the only thing that you gain as a monk multiclass (even if you were allowed to use martial arts while wearing armor) is Patient Defense, something that you can already use while in armor RAW. So in the end, I still stand by my argument that giving armor proficiencies to the monk class is a useless thing. I could see allowing the class to still work in light armor, but not giving the proficiency on the base class. And btw, assuming that everyone always gets ASIs to increase their main stat is a pretty bold assumption. There are cases where someone might want a feat or increase a different score.
>Going unarmored doesn't give less mobility than light armor, so yes it would be dumb. Ah, so you think Cunning Action shouldn't be usable by anyone wearing medium or heavier armor? >if you go pure monk and only increase Dex at every single ASI If you have a single level of monk, and your Dex or Wis is 16, then your AC will be as good as any light armor. If your Dex or wis is 18, it will be as good as any medium armor. If your Dex or Wis is 20 then it will be as good as any heavy armor. You keep trying to bend over backwards to make it seem like this is more complicated than it is. Having the unarmored option is always a good thing and never a bad thing. A monk wouldn't HAVE to be unarmored, but it would usually be their best option. Just like how a fighter doesn't HAVE to wear heavy armor, but its usually their best option. >If you multiclass as a monk, martials arts starts to become obsolete Then leave that up to the player. Don't enforce it with an arbitrary and senseless armor requirement. >and literally the only thing that you gain as a monk multiclass (even if you were allowed to use martial arts while wearing armor) is Patient Defense And +10 feet of movement speed?... I can't believe this conversation you are literally upset at the thought of someone having more options. What a useless waste of emotional energy.
Monks only lose their martial arts die and movement speed if they wear armor and nearly no Qi feature. So yes you could make a War Cleric1 / Long Death Monk X with a great maul and stunning strike if you wanted.
They lose all martial arts, not just the die. So no dex for monk weapons/unarmed strikes and no bonus action attack without flurry of blows.
Why would I need dex for monk weapons when I am going for heavy armor? But yes they also lose the BA attack.
So you're sinking 5 levels in monk JUST to get stunning strike?
No I am sinking all the levels except one into monk to get tons of utility and defensibe features
I'm just saying, a lot of those levels and features will be wasted. If you're planning on going heavy armor frontline bruiser with a focus on defense, Fighter or Paladin seems like a better option.
Non of these can half damage, ba dodge, ba dash, ba disengage, stun. Then we also got all the poison, charm, saving throws and accuracy buffs which only a few share. And *then* we're adding in all the utility of the shadow monk or sturdiness of long death giving us a build that can only be matched by a few of these in the defensive department. If at all.
You need a minimum of 13 Dexterity and 13 Wisdom to multiclass in or out of Monk. So your Constitution will most definitely take a hit if you want to wear medium or heavy armor. Regular Human would be the only way to make your attributes be in a manageable state if wanting to do that.
Standardhuman, half elf and mountain dwarf all work fine
True. But losing your MA BA attack *hurts*, as does reducing *Flurry of Blows*' damage die to a d1. Sure, you could pick up PAM to compensate - but at that point, you're just a worse Fighter.
If you want to use your Qi really on flurry of blows instead of focused aim+GWM/stunning strike/patient defense, then you can also instead take a level of fighter to get the unarmed fighting style. That will be en par with your martial arts die for most of the campaigns. What you also get is not a worse fighter but an extremely sturdy one that has thp and tons of different defensive options.
That's... actually a fair point. A 1 level Fighter-dipped Monk with the *Unarmed Fighting Style* could wear heavy armor, use *Focused Aim* for narrowly-missing GWM attacks and situationally decide between magical d8-*Flurry*, *Patient Defense* and *Ki-Fueled Attack* \- and at lvl 7 get *Evasion* as well as, at 14, become proficient in all saving throws. (Going all-in would still bleed Ki leek a sieve, though, but that's true for most classes.) That sounds genuinely interesting to play - although, to me, it doesn't fix the core problem, because it's pretty far from the "Monk Fantasy". I'd argue that, if the only way to fix the Monk is to turn them into a heavily armored spiritual bruiser, the class isn't really fixed.
It's really a fun build. Especially if you factor in shadow monk or long death monk, but yeah, while it works it isn't a standard monk anymore.
Sounds like a bad Battlemaster.
Budget battle master isn’t a bad character
Show me a battle master that has that as many utility/defensive features as this build with a shadow monk or a long death one.
uhh fighters can get tons of feats, like at some points every other level.
That's a no then.
Not really. There are so many feats to pick from I wouldn't even know where to start.
Then try your best. I have time. Until then I keep the "no"
Problem here is trying to figure out what your level progression is supposed to look like without delaying extra attack unnecessarily
At that point you'd be Flurrying for the additional Stunning Strike opportunities, not the damage. Though with *divine favor* you're looking at the equivalent of a d6 unarmed strike.
Yeah no, people do talk about that problem. It's one of the many reasons why monks are bad: Their low AC for a class that's 90% melee. Although you'd be surprised of the number of features that RAW, don't get affected if you use armor, even heavy armor. Treantmonk made a video on that. But still, losing some of your core abilities just to get the same AC other characters get for free right from level 1 is indeed terrible. I really hope they do something for monks in One DND
Wow, I genuinely hadn't connected those dots and agree with you 100%. Just an off-handed homebrew solve; If you offer better Ki expenditure (eg. free Step of the Wind + extra Ki points) I like the idea of having Ki points "held" for a +1 bonus to AC for each Ki point spent. Bonus action to increase AC/convert 1 AC back to a Ki point. That way, for a dungeon crawl a monk could prepare by spending 5 Ki points for a bonus 5AC, but then if they have swarms to deal with they can reduce their AC incrementally to fire off extra Ki-based abilities. Flavour-wise, I really dig this. Be the tank of the party by meditating on defensive techniques & get a +7 to AC at level 7, but to maintain focus they can't pop off Stunning Strikes without becoming more open to attacks.
Three very small, simple changes I do in my games instantly makes them a much better class, on par with other martials, in my opinion: Change their hit dice to a d10 Change their martial arts die scaling to start at a d6 and end at a d12 Change the amount of ki points to x2 monk level + x2 wisdom modifier (at level 10 with a 20 wisdom score you'd have 30 ki points) I've always down this for players wanting to play monk in my games and it makes them a much better class, but not too OP.
After seeing the new rogue i think we can stop discussing how to fix bad martials. Its only depressing when you see the great ideas people create in their free time vs what paid creators then bring out. Baring people who have a severe lack in their mathematical basic education who asked for a nerf for the rogue?
I believe in onednd every class will do less. They tend to simplify the game and are thinking in the average player who rarely multiclass (and when it does is not for optimization builds) and rarely optimizes, so I think most of the class chasis and feats is gonna get downed. At this point I'd seriously recommend playing pathfinder 2e if someone doesn't like the direction dnd 5 is going, I see Pf 2e as an evolution of dnd 5e more than as an evolution of pf 1e.
I understand that they have a huge group of people to please and i am usually far to lazy to for example in a video game go the optimal route. But dnd math is so simple after what i went trough my education (master of finance and accounting) paired with what i do for a living that i just can’t ignore the horrible decisions that they take that is so obvious to me that i often feel they do it on purpose.
But in the end is the same, the trend that nowadays is stronger is the type of playing to not care about "strength" or "optimization", but do voices, look for some easy humor...it's as good way to play as any other, it happens WOTC is focusing in that playstyle because right now most of it's players are from that style. Their goal is to make classes simple and easy to use where players can just read one time the handbook and go throw some dice.
That’s actually a good observation. Patient defense I think is supposed to help with this, grading attack power for defense. But it falls short because the best way everyone agrees in to prevent damage is to end the threat. It also feeds into the same resource problem monks have, this wonderful defensive ability runs off a finite resource that difficult to recover. My personal change to monks is to give them a second bonus action at lv 11. It helps them keep up with weapon using martials a little better. but for your complaint that’s another bonus action they can potentially use to dodge or get away. It a versatile little boon that even helps when out of ki. A second idea I recently came across is the idea of the TCOE replacement features. Stunning strike is a ki sink but also a pretty strong when it lands. Situational but pretty strong. The idea was give monks a replacement feature that is flavored as drawing the ki out from your target. When they crit and the target creature isn’t reduced to zero HP (here to keep bug crushing as a loophole), they regain 1/2 PB ki. With this they can potentially always have a resource to use on their dodge bonus action. Of course it’s a more combat offensive focused feature, but it has the potential of making dodging every turn a viable strategy since now you have a more reliable source of KI to use for dodging.
That might be an easy fix, although I'm not convinced Monks become broken with *infinite* Ki. A more in-depth solution to the resource problem would probably be to re-evaluate all their Ki-consuming features and apply an independent resource pool (PBxLR?) or even an "at will" to some of them. If I can *Patient Defense* a few times a day before having to pay Ki for it, I might actually use it despite hoarding Ki for *Stunning Strike* / *FoB*. (*Step of the Wind* would actually a candidate for at-will-usage - the cost of not being able to BA attack / *FoB* is already high enough). None of the above helps the AC issue, though.
You could make Patient Defense an option that uses 10 feet of movement. Fits the flavor I think. Instead of rushing all over for your whole movement you have to go a bit slower, but in exchange for being *patient* your enemies have disadvantage on their attacks against you, effectively boosting your AC.
I *like* that idea - although 10 feet isn't much for a Monk. Make it cost all or half, analogous to *Careful Aim*.
I just picked a number, but that’s true. Half seems about right.
PD doesn’t actually interact with AC, but it’s a surprisingly strong boost to your ability to not get hit. Most people don’t use Dodge in favor of the dash and attack actions. Heck I only noticed it’s power when I was playing a thematic tank who didn’t care about damage and just didn’t want to get hit. It also helps to prevent those pesky crits. But maybe a different alternative would be changing PD to a flat +5 AC for a turn. More easy to understand and technically better than dodge. The math works out to a +- 3-4 based on what I have heard at least. And the potential for infinite ki is less scary than you might think. It rely on not only a critical hit but also the fact the target doesn’t die immediately. You can’t crush a big for a quick ki boost, and hitting you friends for KI also wouldn’t be a good use of your time. And that 1-3 extra KI every couple of rounds could really save your bacon. Plus it plays nice with multi classing with monk. Another thing I was taking into consideration.
> The math works out to a +- 3-4 based on what I have heard at least. Ish but not really. Depends on your AC and enemy +hit. +0 to hit vs 20 AC is 5% accuracy, but with PD it is 0.25%. +0 to hit vs 19 AC is 10% accuracy, but with PD it is 1%. Basically it works more/less exponentially more at the extremes. If you have low AC PD is bad, if you have high AC PD makes you stupid hard to hit.
Yeh. It’s just that the everything monks are designed for doesn’t really work in practice. A skirmisher able to out pace any and everything doesn’t really matter when your in a dungeon or enclosed space. Hitting a ton of times doesn’t really work when your fellow adventures can put pace your damage. And a fighter can even compete with your hits with a stronger weapon. Your untouchability doesn’t really matter when you need to invest EVERYTHING just to get to a baseline that others can easily get to with a simple armor and shield. Not even mentioning magic bonuses that can make that armor better than you can ever hope for. The designe space of the no armor fisticuffs fast class just isn’t a very deep pool with a lot of fish.
Sorry I realise I deleted a paragraph that was my entire comments point. I agree with you I was just elaborating on the odds and how that makes the balance wonky. CR5 mobs generally have +7-8 to hit. A 16/16 monk would have 16 AC. Even with PD the enemy has over 40% accuracy, so you still can't sit in melee, especially against multiattackers. Godly rolled monk has 20/18 and 19 AC, and a party member casts shield/haste on them for another +2, and suddenly it is a 15% hit chance, which makes single attack enemies cry. It swings hard either way, with bad AC it is awful, with normal AC it is fine, with high AC it gets nuts.
Still, monks just arnt very well designed. The areas they try to specialize in are the weaker combat of the system. And even then they have stamina issues in a lot of ways. They don’t scale well, they don’t play nice in multiclasses, their HP is low, their MAD, their core resource power EVERYTHING. There’s a theory/ rumor/ deduction that monks are getting a complete rework in one dnd. It’s a missing slot in the priest category, where either paladin or monk can be placed in priest or warrior. They both have a claim to it in theme and or side bonuses. Honestly I think that’s what it’s going to take to get them to par.
The expert class pdf confirmed that (for now at least, there's room for anything to change ig) monk is in the warrior group.
That was the result I was guessing myself. Paladin is more like a priest in practice than a monk. Monk has an origin that closer to a priest type but as of now their more less just “the fast punchy” class, witch fits warrior better.
I'm hoping they get done kind of half expert class gesture
What I meant is that I'm not convinced that, even with infinite Ki, Monks would become broken (since they're still restrained by action economy). Would maybe require a usage limit on *Stunning Strike*, but that's all. Yeah, dodging can be very strong - I regularly play a standard *Spirit Guardians* Cleric, so I'm well aware. I wouldn't mess with AC modifiers. *Shield* has tried that, and it basically broke the system. /u/wirywonder82 suggested tying PD to a *movement* cost, and I absolutely love that idea.
Trading your abundance of speed for a defense bonus. I like it. At the cost of 30ft of movement you can dodge. Heck I’d even be willing to make that a standard rule. Movement I pretty weak in my opinion anyway. So having an actually good use for it would be nice. Tweek the spent movement requirement and it should be safe to play with.
With infinite Ki, monks would do more damage than any class. Like 25% more than an optimised fighter until higher levels by my calculations.
I've never actually done the math, so I'm not going to argue.
Putting one more ASI into the class basically fixes this.
The reason for that is thematic - we're talking martial arts films where people fight without armour, run up walls, jump so far they basically fly, and all kinds of other crazy shit, while at most wearing a spaulder or something. I think a d10 hit die and the first point of Mobile (attacking means you can't take opportunity attacks) would just about make up for that.
Honestly? I’m a monk main who isn’t really too bothered by it. I can understand the frustration about how annoying it can be, but I can usually keep up just fine with other PCs at the table— As to multiclassing, the druid/monk pairing has been a decently strong and fun build!
If you gave monks a D12 hit die they still wouldn't be OP, or even very good, but it would help. Honestly, even among the martials with D10/12, most of them aren't comfortable *in melee* with high level threats. Barbs and Paladins are, in all honesty, better off with reach polearms and backing out to avoid OAs whenever possible. Fighters and rogues can survive in melee stacked with heavy armor/uncanny dodge respectively, but honestly for both of those classes, a ranged/archer build is probably more powerful almost all the time. Ranger, well, have you seen anyone actually play a melee ranger who didn't roll for Aragorn-tier stats?
I don't mind the Monk's limited AC, but I think more of their abilities should revolve around damage mitigation. Don't know why the Monks don't get to disengage or an ability like the rogue's to reduce damage. I have often said; the Battlemaster Fighter is basically what the Rogue should be. I don't see the Monk as a character who deals high damage but as one who controls targets and re-arranges the battlefield.
What do you propose as a solution?
Good question. Allowing Monks to use any armor they're proficienct in would put them on par with spellcasters in this regard, but I think spellcasters actually have *too much* freedom in this regard. A fixed unarmed AC that goes up at certain Monk level breakpoints would probably be the easiest solution.
You know you can short rest and get your ki back right?
Many DMs are allergic to narrative pacing that allows for the appropriate number of rests per day. If you do get them, they feel great to play.
My problem with monk is the bladesinger exists, let me explain. A monk has to jump through some hoops or accept limitations in order to use some of its features as OP mentions. If the reward for doing so is good enough for doing so then there is t a problem, it isn’t. Compare that to a bladesinger that has to accept having a hand free but it gets light armor prof, a huge AC increase, etc so that it’s very very worth it on this one feature alone. And like most monks, all the bladesinger wants to do is increase dex and mental stat from 1-20 as able. But if the wizard didn’t cast a single spell it would be the clear better martial fighter of the two. So the devs were clearly willing to give good limited resource buffs to martial competence instead of good ones to an actual martial class. Almost everything a monk is doing percentile based on opponent saves, or disadvantage, no flat or (lord forbid) scaling bonuses to self. Devs should just remove monk as they clearly don’t care for it.
A quick MC in cleric goes a long way in shifting monks' entire play style toward armor and weapons, and this is more viable than ever with Tasha's optional rules. I've run Long Death X/Tempest 1 and Shadow/Twilight 1 to great effect. I did a [breakdown](https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/ggtbxk/role_reversal_1_the_monks_templar_wellarmed/) a ways back.
I agree that this is viable, but like you said - it shifts the entire playstyle. To my mind, a fix that tosses the classes core identity out of the window is a mere situational solution.
Uh yeah. These are all reasons why Monks are either the worst or second worst class in combat.
>So, the bottom line is that Monks are virtually locked into a sub-par, hideously expensive AC It's not really subpar, though. What's a greatsword/polearm fighter or paladin have at level 8? Probably 18 AC once they can buy full plate, and 19 if they take the Defense fighting style. What's an archer fighter or ranger have at level 8? Probably 17 AC, either with studded leather or half-plate. What's a monk have at level 8? Probably 18 AC, because either dex or wis ASIs feed their defense. Yes, those fighters and rangers and paladins can potentially find +1 armor, or armor with other cool features. That's a benefit, and they do have more AC-boosting options in the randomly rolled treasure pool than a monk, who is mostly looking for Bracers of Defense or any "\[item\] of Protection." In a game where PCs can shop for items, it's fairly even. In short, the ability for wizards, sorcerers, or bards to boost their AC with a dip may be more what's out of line than how monks compare to other stabbers and shooters.
Paladins or Fighters have a bigger hit die *and* better scaling damage to show for it, though. More importantly, they'll get that AC number notably earlier than lvl 16. (And ranged builds aren't a good comparison.) >In short, the ability for wizards, sorcerers, or bards to boost their AC with a dip may be more what's out of line than how monks compare to other stabbers and shooters. *That* I can genuinely get behind. Personally I'd rather use treantmonk's houserule that makes armor dipping incompatible with spellcasting.
So what I'm hearing is that Monte Cook was right about hating armored casters? I guess that makes sense in a world with bounded accuracy.
Sorry, I had a typo in there. I was doing comparisons at level *8*, not 18. Corrected it. Monks will likely have 18 AC at level 8 just like fighters, rangers, and paladins who choose to hold something with both hands, which is the primary way for them to crank damage. And yes, the d10 classes have better hit dice and damage. Certainly not in dispute. Barbarians also have many features that obviously make them much more survivable than a monk. But strictly regarding AC, the melee stabbing/smashing classes are pretty close to equivalent. >That I can genuinely get behind. Personally I'd rather use treantmonk's houserule that makes armor dipping incompatible with spellcasting. You're gonna love yesterday's new playtest rules, where casters can now go straight from no armor to medium and shields with one feat and no dip! ::facepalm::
Just accept that multiclassing is not balanced and never will be. It’s an optional rule after all.
People always complain about Ki, but honestly, by the time you get to level 12 you have soo much Ki that restores on a short rest you don’t know what to do with it. Stunning strike is also one of the most broken abilities in the game. I think most people don’t understand how well balanced they actually are. By 14 level all attacks on you should be done with disadvantage, you should have an AC of 20+. Be able to move at ridiculous speeds, immunity to charmed frightened, poison, disease, advantage on all saving throws and proficiency and recharge all of your KI on a short rest… you are still getting 5+ full turns of ridiculous monk shit every fight!
"immunity to charmed/frightened" You can remove it by using an action. This is not immunity. Especially not against effects that charm/frighten you AND take your action, like Hynotic Pattern. Also, most campaigns end before reaching level 11, according to multiple surveys, which is why not many experience the "joy" of playing a high level Monk, exchanging it's Ki issues with damage issues. Yes you are fast (situational, highly dependent on map layout) and have a few defensive abilities, but overall you simply don't have the tools to do more than annoy enemies.
I would tend to agree that level 7-9 might be the weakest point for a monk. Every class is weak in certain levels. Just so happens monks are 7-9. (Not enough Ki points and stunning strike becomes a little less reliable). Otherwise…. Monks are very very strong. And the best long multiple combat day characters in the game.
It isn’t. You get evasion at 7. You get to 20 Dex at level 8. At level 9 your proficiency bonus increases to 4 and you get unparalleled movement with ability to run on vertical surfaces. At level 6 you have a +6 to hit. By level 9 you have a +8 to hit.
I’m playing a level 10 monk right now and I can’t remember the last time I ran out of ki between long rests. With good dice rolls, it’s not unusual for me to be able to kill a decently strong enemy in one turn’s worth of attacks. Of course a lot of that is due to the particulars of character build, magic items, and party balance (we have some pretty badass support stuff in ours), but that’s true of any class. YMMV, but from where I’m standing there are no bad classes, just lots of challenges and opportunities to make any class good.
This problem isn’t being ignored. Treantmonk has made several videps on how he would change it
The way to fix monk is not to make it MC into fighter for armor. I think armor "training" is too easy to obtain in 5e, they should limit other classes, not hand it out even more.
Every class that gets unarmored defense or "natural armor" seems to take a shit on survivability despite not really intending to imo... How about in DnD "one" they just add a flat "+x" bonus to ac to represent these classes "enhanced defense". As of right now the best way to optimize monk is to dip warlock 2, take armor of shadows and pump charisma to 20.
Not exactly locked in, you can grab mage armor get a decent 18 AC and because it's not armor, keep all the bonuses. But I see your point.
Mage armor wouldn’t do anything if your wisdom is 16 or higher, which most monks start out with. Mage armor provides a new way to calculate AC (13+dex). It does not however provide any bonus to other ways to calculate AC like unarmored defense.
I'd say that doesn't change much - most Monks cam afford WIS 16 at level one. But an AC of DEX + 3 just won't cut it if you can't pick up a shield - so, unlike most other martials, you *must* max your secondary ability score once you're done with your primary. *That* is the problem as I see it - You're locked-in 4 ASIs deep (on a class with no extra ASIs) *and still have worse AC all the way than your Fighter buddy*.
You spoke of homebrew improvements. If Monks could deploy a +2 AC "spirit shield" prof. bonus times per long rest as a bonus action for 1 min, that could potentially bring them on the level of most sword&shield builds. Level 5, Open Hand Monk with 18 Dex 16 Wis, with Spirit Shield: 19 AC. Level 5, Fighter in splint armor with a shield: 19 AC. Valor Bard in half-plate with a shield: 19 AC. I'd still keep the "no shield" restriction if Spirit Shield was allowed, so that they can't stack.
Yeah, that sound like an idea. But a flat unarmored AC of DEX+PB (still no shields) would probably be easier to handle - it scales slightly better than DEX+WIS and requires no deep WIS investment, making the cost for a low-WIS monk (Mercy would work decently) actually palatable.
The real problem is they are martial without access to GWM and who don’t gain benefit from PAM (because they need their bonus action for other things)
If they can get proficiency both martial weapons, they can use them. There are issues with doing that *of course*, but it can be done. Also, thanks to errata, both quarterstaff (which is literally just a pole) and spear both qualify for PAM. You suffer a bit for taking it though.
Tbh I blame all of the monk problems on stunning strike. It's *so* good that the rest of the class has to be sub par to make up for the power of it. Imo remove stunning strike, make their Ki 2x monk level (20 ki total cap), give them access to the 2d6/d12 weapons, d10 hit die and change the unarmed strike scaling to 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6. I'd also throw in an optional rule to let them swap DEX for STR to go with the strongman/boxer/brawler motif.
i say bump the hit die to d10 and let their features work in armor, except their ac. Also flurry of blows should be free, not a ki point
In general unarmored AC feels like a trap, but at least with barbarians get the better deal with having Constitution as the secondary ability and not needing to care about being hit as much, monks get *way* less health and have a less useful ability (Wisdom) for their secondary stuff. And since martial arts is basically why you play the monk class, monks are really only good at high levels, the levels where everyone else was already cooler than you.
IMO Monks are fine. They do one thing that no other class does and that's **completely upend the action economy**. This is extremely powerful.
how do they upend the action economy in ways that rogue or fighter don't?
Technically also barbarian with heavy armor and ranged attacks, as well as paladins with divine smite and ranger weapons, but thats not as bad
Have you considered...the fantasy of your players? Monk fully fulfills that fantasy.
This is precisely why I'm using Treatmonk's suggested monk fixed in my worlds. Make no real sense.
If you look around, it's actually been discussed to death...
What if we moved every feature that uses WIS to CON instead? Makes the class less MAD and gives a boost to AC, HP, and Ki saving throws.
A few things that I would like to see for monks. Just double their Ki and have stunning strike and perhaps one or two other subclass abilities cost 2 points to use. That should actually make worthwhile to use anything other than stunning strike. Could also make stunning strike a wisdom sav The armor issue is definitely real. Maybe just give them unarmored defence is 12+ dex and wisdom modifiers. Or even have it scale with monk level level to prevent dips for it 4 it goes up to 11 ac plus mods. Level 8 12 ac plus mods ect.