D&D (2024) Playtest Packet 6: Monk reactions?

[see]

Not sure I understand this logic.

'We can't do it all in one class with subclasses"

Yes.

Therefore

'We should try to do it in one subclass of the class that is already trying to hold every non-wuxia generic warrior archetype' ?

It depends on what the antecedent to your "it" there is. If it's the same as the "it all" in the previous sentence, then no, of course not. I'm not calling for deleting the monk class.

You have the monk with various subclasses, and then you have a fighter subclass to relieve the pressure for a "Strength monk" or whatnot. In part for what the subclass can do on its own, in part because as an example it'll finally get people to stop narrowly focusing on the monk class as if it were the only possible vessel for wuxia fighters.

 

[mellored]

Another random idea.

Unarmored Defense
Your AC is equal to 12 + your Dexterity modifier.
While using this feature, you can expend 10' of movement (no action) to gain a +1 AC bonus until the start of your next turn.
You can do this after you see an attack roll (such as an opportunity attack), but before effects, potentially make the attack miss.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't like how Monk weapons aren't a thing in this playtest packet.

I’d prefer they just get martial weapons. Nothing in the monk breaks with a glaive.

The more I review the Monk changes the more upset I am with this version of the monk. They took the weakest class, and while so far almost every other class is being made stronger (at least the other martial classes are) they made the monk weaker by removing the dedicated weapon feature and the applicability of their die to weapons. They also are still dependent on short rests after bending over backwards for the Warlock to not be dependent on them. Then they removed short sword proficiency which locks Monk out of pretty much every good weapon oriented feat by not being able to get a martial weapon anymore. It's absurd. How do they not understand the monk isn't where it needs to be?

Yeah it’s really pretty bad.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Another random idea.

Unarmored Defense
Your AC is equal to 12 + your Dexterity modifier.
While using this feature, you can expend 10' of movement (no action) to gain a +1 AC bonus until the start of your next turn.
You can do this after you see an attack roll (such as an opportunity attack), but before effects, potentially make the attack miss.

I've been considering something like this, the problem is that while I want the monk to have stronger defenses, I worry this becomes too good. It is not difficult to get a monk whose speed is 70, which makes a baseline +7 to AC.

Then again, you did lower their AC by making it 12 + Dex, so it could work... hmmmm...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I've been considering something like this, the problem is that while I want the monk to have stronger defenses, I worry this becomes too good. It is not difficult to get a monk whose speed is 70, which makes a baseline +7 to AC.

Then again, you did lower their AC by making it 12 + Dex, so it could work... hmmmm...

Too complicated and granular.

Why not just +5 AC for being slowed next turn.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Yes.


It depends on what the antecedent to your "it" there is. If it's the same as the "it all" in the previous sentence, then no, of course not. I'm not calling for deleting the monk class.

You have the monk with various subclasses, and then you have a fighter subclass to relieve the pressure for a "Strength monk" or whatnot. In part for what the subclass can do on its own, in part because as an example it'll finally get people to stop narrowly focusing on the monk class as if it were the only possible vessel for wuxia fighters.

I guess I understand that. It just sounds more like a condemnation of the fundamental class design to me.

Like we can have one class (the fighter) that is broad enough to hold a huge variety of warrior archetypes across multiple cultures AND some of the wuxia ones.

But the class specifically built to facilitate wuxia archetypes cannot even hold all the wuxia ones.

Like, I can see how it's a solution. And of course no class should be able to hold everything. But it seems to me that a purpose built class should be able to fulfill more of it's purpose.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Too complicated and granular.

Why not just +5 AC for being slowed next turn.

That made me realize that this is ripe for multi-class abuse. It wasn't a reaction, so it could be a single level dip for casters. That wouldn't be good either way.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That made me realize that this is ripe for multi-class abuse. It wasn't a reaction, so it could be a single level dip for casters. That wouldn't be good either way.

It should be a reaction anyway.

 

[mellored]

That made me realize that this is ripe for multi-class abuse. It wasn't a reaction, so it could be a single level dip for casters. That wouldn't be good either way.

A single level dip for armor and shields would could get 18-20 AC (plus second wind or whatever)

This with a typical 30' speed and +3 Dex, would be AC 15 to 18 (if you stood still).

You need a speed boost to make it worth while. And even then, your trading that exact boost.

Too complicated and granular.

Certainly a bit more complex than a flat AC.
But I thought it was a fun idea.

 

[see]

But the class specifically built to facilitate wuxia archetypes cannot even hold all the wuxia ones.

Except that's not what the monk is. The 5e monk was "specifically built to facilitate" playing the previous-editions D&D monk, and that was specifically built around playing Remo Williams from the "The Destroyer" novels. Anything else the 5e monk chassis can do is pure bonus . . . and since we're having a backwards-compatible update, not an edition change, it's what we're stuck with.

And that's the real key advantage of adding a ki/discipline/whatever subclass to the fighter. A subclass alone would relieve some specific mechanical pressure, but far more importantly it'd take this idea that the monk is the "wuxia class" and punch it in the face.