You can still dual-wield if you want, it's just your bonus action attack is dependent on it. Also if its an unarmed attack, you still get Ability Modifier damage, so technically 12 rather than 2. But yes, you will take a damage dip if you stuck to punching and didn't pick up tavern brawler.
That's assuming a 20 strength. Gonna be a few levels before you can get there. So what about the level 1-3 monk that needs to survive long enough to make it there? At that level if they hit with both attacks they deal 8 damage over two flurry attacks assuming a strength of 16, where the Dex monk without that problem deals an average of 11 damage assuming he is using unarmed strike, and an average of 13 assuming he is using a shortsword. This also assumes a game that allows feats, and taking those feats also reduces how high you can pump your stats. So a strength based build needs to take a feat just to sort of keep up with a dex based build that can also forgo the feat and increase their stat, or needs to use a second weapon which without taking additional proficiencies or class dips limits the second weapon to a shortsword. Seems like a lot of hoops to jump through for one build to just even keep up with the other.
But you do have a higher AC. Again dual wielding maintains the number of attacks. Also disengaging and not being able to "run away" does infer he can just run after you again. Attack the guy standing next to the barbarian - not so much.
It technically maintains the number of attacks, but those attacks deal less damage and don't benefit from the strength modifier without Flurry of Blows. So without multiclassing for a fighting style, a strength based build doesn't even benefit from their strength score while a dex based one does.
And yes, disengaging does not mean they will follow, but hit-and-run tactics are one of the reasons a monk can fight in melee without needing as much HP or the damage resistance of a Barbarian. Once again, strength-based builds seem to sacrifice a great deal while not providing any incentive to go that route.
Well, for a start if you could somehow get into armour (Fighter Dip), you'd have a screaming high AC compared to a bread and butter Monk......Otherwise you'd be occupying a similar tactical space to a rogue, agreed. You still get Deflect Missiles and Evasion - Decent damage mitigation - you do still have ki not tied up in flurry of blows if you don't want it. But yeah, they'd be more squishy than most other melee classes and so would have to rely on tactics more.
That assumes that this player wants to take a fighter dip, or that this game allows multiclassing. And why be a monk at all if they are just essentially a fighter since they wouldn't get their Martial Arts ability, which I argue is THE defining feature of the monk. Additionally, while evasion and deflect missiles is nice, you still have to deal with the frontline attacks. Which means either you are always using Dodge, or attempting to hit-and-run, but much less effectively than a dex based monk could.
Again, I don't disagree - all i'm saying is that everything you've said is about maintaining a high AC, which is more about the fundamental rules of the game and the balance therein, than a Monk being built for DEX. In a more forgiving game type where lethality is lower, and the GM gives you some AC boosting kit....you can play a STR Monk as is.
But yes, of course it is sub-optimal, as are quite a lot of builds - I've actually poorly represented my article by going into the detail, because I broadly agree. My point is, a monk is DEX based because of the Design of D&D AC, not by class intention. And that is, picking a Monk with the 13,13,13,12,12,12 array will give you identical problems. That's just how D&D works. Once you say that array is impossible to play for one class, you're better off changing the entire game.
Please don't take my comments as hostile. That's not my intention. But I disagree that the Dex based monk option is JUST about AC. Using anything but a Dex based monk nerfs the other defining monk abilities and requires so much work to make it even playable that it is not worth it. Yes, I could make a wizard that only wants to go into melee, but that character is not going to live long because it does not play into his strengths. Why be a melee wizard when I can be an eldritch knight or bladelock? Additionally, we see examples of the Barbarian having the same basic structure through Unarmored Defense, but they specifically get access to armor and shields because it is EXTREMELY hard to take advantage of a Barbarian with high dex or have a dex based barbarian. The designers knew that by design, such a barbarian doesn't work since its rage ability is specifically designed to only enhance melee strength based weapons. For the monk, the same is not true. A monk specifically needs to take advantage of dex to use their abilities, and because dex is tied to AC and they get Unarmored Defense, a monk that has access to armor and shields is much more likely to end up with an unhittable AC. So they threw in that limit of no armor and no shields to prevent such abuse, but it also simultaneously and perhaps unintentionally forced monks into a Dex based class.
